Rule system for storytelling DM's

[Trolleitor]

I was reading about some problems with railroalding storytelling dms and I started to wonder which rule system would be optimal for that kind of play.

I know a DM that is also a novelist and in his campaigns the players are more something like spectators (like Pippin and Merry on LotR) which a very hard time to really change things. Usually when a player try to accomplish something that can really have an impact, he set DC's at nearly impossible numbers, or nearly hopeless battles against overhwhelming npc's.

Don't get him wrong, it seems like his players enjoy his games because he has really impressive skills at telling a story. But this DM is always struggling because he "don't give a **** about the rules", he hates learning a new rule system. This makes him let his players pick the rules and then he tries to ignore this rules, specially if they allow the players narrative control.


This puts group narrative systems, like FATE, outside of the formula.

He wants to narrate, he wants player to listen, he wants the players to answer like the characters they are roleplaying (which the DM probably made anyways).

So why do you guys think? Can you recommend a system fro DM's like this guy?

Edit: If you're curious about examples, this DM several months ago invited me to a campaign for 5 players, he already has a several of characters in mind, and the rule system was star wars saga edition. The characters were a level 3 soldier, a level 9 scoundrel, a level 17 jedi consular (I can't remember the other two). Unfortunately I couldn't join that campaign, a shame, I was so curious to know how the hell that can work.

[Thrudd]

You want a system that will rein in this behavior, and get the GM to give the players more agency? If the GM will ignore the game rules and just wants to tell a story to some people, then it doesn't matter what system you suggest.
You want a system that has built into the rules the idea that the players are passive observers of a story? I don't think there is one, and there wouldn't be a point. You don't need a system for that: as is evident already, no matter what the game is supposed to be like the GM will ignore the rules and just tell the story.

If you want a change, you need someone else to be the GM. Choose whatever game you like.

[Koo Rehtorb]

I recommend Microsoft Word, so he can write stories without pesky players getting in the way.

[Trolleitor]

You want a system that will rein in this behavior, and get the GM to give the players more agency? If the GM will ignore the game rules and just wants to tell a story to some people, then it doesn't matter what system you suggest.
You want a system that has built into the rules the idea that the players are passive observers of a story? I don't think there is one, and there wouldn't be a point. You don't need a system for that: as is evident already, no matter what the game is supposed to be like the GM will ignore the rules and just tell the story.

If you want a change, you need someone else to be the GM. Choose whatever game you like.

Oh no, I just want to suggest him a system. As I said I'm not one of his players.

I recommend Microsoft Word, so he can write stories without pesky players getting in the way.

Well he's a novelist so... Probably got this covered

[Thrudd]

Oh no, I just want to suggest him a system. As I said I'm not one of his players.

But what's the point if he doesn't want to learn new rules and won't even follow the rules of whatever game he's running? If he just wants to tell stories, it doesn't matter what system he uses. You can do that without any system at all.

What's the motive for suggesting him a system? Suggesting a different setting for the next story? A system that will not allow him to run the game this way?

[Grod_The_Giant]

So you need something that's a) Very very simple, and b) gives the players absolutely no agency?

[JeenLeen]

If you want a game that is rules-light but not like how you describe FATE, I think a d10 system like World of Darkness (new verses old, for rules simplicity), Exalted, or Scion.

The games do have a lot of rules, but he could avoid some of the more complicated sub-systems. The games are built for strongly narrative games, and while there are rewards in-game (at least for Exalted, maybe the others) for cool RP on the player's end, the DM's style shouldn't clash with it, nor should he have to do things like set up absurd DCs for most things.
NOTE: I would not generally consider these rules-light games, but between the various things you wrote, I think they could work well and be relatively easy to learn, particularly if he has someone to explain the basics of d10 success/failure calculations (and, for Exalted, how initiative works.) I am speaking from Exalted 2nd edition; the newer release might be easier.

A potential issue is that these games are fairly setting-specific. You could port them into a class fantasy setting, but it would be hard. Exalted is great for some epic storytelling, though, and has a rich setting.

Spoiler: off topic

Show

It's neat and kind of refreshing how this guy sounds like several red flags about a bad DM rolled into one, but the players enjoy the game and this isn't a rant or (at least strong) criticism of his DMing style. Sincerely, cool.

[kyoryu]

So.... I'd suggest 3.x/Pathfinder.

Sounds weird, right? But in a rules-light game, the whole point is that you're focusing on the decisions that the players make and not the minutae of the mechanics.

If you take away the decisions that the players make, you've gotta replace it with something... and 3.x/PF give the players a level of interesting choices between combat and character builds to keep them engaged.

[CharonsHelper]

Amber Diceless.

[Darth Ultron]

Well, any edition of D&D, at least zero to 3.5, plus Pathfinder, is made for this type of play. 1E or 2E are the best, as they have the rules of thing like ''what is written here is just a suggestion, a DM can do what they want'' and ''the DM has the final say on everything''.

[Grod_The_Giant]

If you want a game that is rules-light but not like how you describe FATE, I think a d10 system like World of Darkness (new verses old, for rules simplicity), Exalted, or Scion.

Uhh... I dunno about WoD or Scion, but Exalted (both 2e and 3e) is one of the crunchiest systems I've ever played, and much more confusing and opaque than, say, 3.5. To say nothing of being one that gives more power to the player characters (not the players themselves, mind) than most, not less.

I'd say maybe something like Risus would be best; if the DM isn't going to bother with rules or allowing the players to influence things, there's no use proposing a game where rules matter or the players get explicit metagame powers.

[Trolleitor]

So.... I'd suggest 3.x/Pathfinder.

Sounds weird, right? But in a rules-light game, the whole point is that you're focusing on the decisions that the players make and not the minutae of the mechanics.

If you take away the decisions that the players make, you've gotta replace it with something... and 3.x/PF give the players a level of interesting choices between combat and character builds to keep them engaged.

The problem with traditional d20 3.5 approach is that, because he doesn't like rules that doesn't help him tell story, he's gonna "make up" the challenges.

D20 3.5 systems actually "constricts" players options by making them excel at something, the characters must follow the rules, that constricts what actions those characters can make, but the DM is not constricted by this rules, in any single way.

Combats probably will last until the DM feels like the purpose of the encounter has been achieved.

The DM will then learn the rules by a eye-ball method, he will learn than when the rogue sneak he usually rolls X were X is a massive number because of the skill progression. Then the DM will bend the rules to suit his vision of how this scene should go. But he will always remember what is a "good sneak roll", so the next time a no-rogue character tries to sneak, he will fail because his roll will pale in comparisson of the rogue rolls.

This ultimately makes things harder for players.

Maybe I made things a bit confusing, I'm sorry english is not my native language.

This DM actually tends to use d20 systems, and it usually ends with, lets say, weird fights, weird DC's for challenges, etc.

So you need something that's a) Very very simple, and b) gives the players absolutely no agency?

Oh no no, sorry maybe I didn't were clear enough.
He puts players inside the world of his novels, the story is already written, he actually loves to see players making weird ass decisions that he didn't think off on his stories.

But sometimes, players been players, will make things that really change the story. Then he asks for, usually a very high roll, I guess that's because, he then needs to adjust some writing.

Anyways, back to the point. Probably very simple rules is not what he's looking for. He probably wants somethings that go more along the line of "intuitive", he probably don't want to know nothing about tables or numbers, solid enough to be predictable, so he can gauge the difficulty, open enough to fit new settings, prep light enough to fit on his narrative style of prep.

[Trolleitor]

If you want a game that is rules-light but not like how you describe FATE, I think a d10 system like World of Darkness (new verses old, for rules simplicity), Exalted, or Scion.

The games do have a lot of rules, but he could avoid some of the more complicated sub-systems. The games are built for strongly narrative games, and while there are rewards in-game (at least for Exalted, maybe the others) for cool RP on the player's end, the DM's style shouldn't clash with it, nor should he have to do things like set up absurd DCs for most things.
NOTE: I would not generally consider these rules-light games, but between the various things you wrote, I think they could work well and be relatively easy to learn, particularly if he has someone to explain the basics of d10 success/failure calculations (and, for Exalted, how initiative works.) I am speaking from Exalted 2nd edition; the newer release might be easier.

A potential issue is that these games are fairly setting-specific. You could port them into a class fantasy setting, but it would be hard. Exalted is great for some epic storytelling, though, and has a rich setting.

Spoiler: off topic

Show

It's neat and kind of refreshing how this guy sounds like several red flags about a bad DM rolled into one, but the players enjoy the game and this isn't a rant or (at least strong) criticism of his DMing style. Sincerely, cool.

I think that a light version of WoD system could fit his DMing style with a few adjustments, and as far as I know a high % of players on our city really loves rolling a bunch of dies.

[Durzan]

Star Wars Fantasy Flight is pretty good. I dunno how easy or how hard it is to GM, but as a player I had a blast during the brief time I was playing a character for the Force & Destiny beta. (GM stopped showing up, and I couldn't contact him, so the game ofc fell apart.)

If you need too, you can always refluff the lore, classes, and races to suit your needs.

[kyoryu]

Star Wars Fantasy Flight is pretty good. I dunno how easy or how hard it is to GM, but as a player I had a blast during the brief time I was playing a character for the Force & Destiny beta. (GM stopped showing up, and I couldn't contact him, so the game ofc fell apart.)

By forcing GMs to deal with unexpected complications, it seems like it'd go against the storyteller goals of the OP.

Really, the best thing for that would probably be just go freeform, since the GM really just wants an audience for their story anyway.

[WbtE]

He probably wants a custom ultra-lite system. Given that success and failure don't really matter and it's just about the narrative, play with poker chips:

If the players do something zany or entertaining that the DM likes, he gives them a chip. Maybe they get a chip for finishing each chapter, too.

If the players want to change something that the DM values, he sets a starting cost in chips. Then the players haggle with him. e.g. "OK, we don't have enough to sneak up and stab the dark lord in the back. Could we get a discount if we sneak up and he only notices us at the last moment?"

[Lorsa]

It would probably help if we knew more what the players want out of playing with this DM. What is the benefit in doing this as an RPG rather than, say, reading his book?

[Grod_The_Giant]

Oh no no, sorry maybe I didn't were clear enough.
He puts players inside the world of his novels, the story is already written, he actually loves to see players making weird ass decisions that he didn't think off on his stories.

But sometimes, players been players, will make things that really change the story. Then he asks for, usually a very high roll, I guess that's because, he then needs to adjust some writing.

Anyways, back to the point. Probably very simple rules is not what he's looking for. He probably wants somethings that go more along the line of "intuitive", he probably don't want to know nothing about tables or numbers, solid enough to be predictable, so he can gauge the difficulty, open enough to fit new settings, prep light enough to fit on his narrative style of prep.

Oh, okay. That's not as bad as I was afraid of from the original post.

• I suggest something like Fudge (the basis of Fate, but without Aspects). The downside is that it's more of a toolbox than a fully developed system, but I'm sure you could find an appropriate version for whatever setting out there. The key feature is that it rates everything on an "adjective ladder"-- you can just say "this is a Great challenge" or "I have a Fair" skill at this, and you can instantly convert that to a number. It also has a nicely consistent dice engine, with a strong bell curve around 0 (meaning if you have a Good skill, you'll probably succeed on a Good task), but it can be awkward to use without their custom dice. (Two +'s, two -'s, and two 0's). Fate adds Aspects, which are sort of key descriptive details in the world or characters that can be Invoked (gain a bonus) or Compelled (must act according to said detail) by exchanging metagame currency, which your DM might like and might despise.
• You might also check out Dungeon World, Apocalypse World, or other Powered by the Apocalypse systems-- I personally didn't like my experience with said games, but a lot of people really like them for lighter RPG play.
• I'll arrogantly throw in the hat for my homebrew system, STaRS. The basic idea is that it plays very quickly and requires very little mechanical effort on the part of the DM. Everything is 1d10, roll-under-your-stat, with a short little difficulty ladder (auto-fail, disadvantage, normal check, advantage, auto-succeed). No numerical bonuses or penalties, just modifiers that are literally "make this easier" or "make this harder." The DM adds one ad-hoc modifier to any plausible check and that's all they have to worry about in terms of assigning DC. There's a link to the basic rules in my signature.

[flond]

I'd say probably not Powered by the Apocalypse. It's...very strongly character spindling (by design) and seems to be the explicit opposite of what they want. (Something like Risus is probably fine though)

[kyoryu]

I'd say probably not Powered by the Apocalypse. It's...very strongly character spindling (by design) and seems to be the explicit opposite of what they want. (Something like Risus is probably fine though)

Yeah, I'd agree. AW, Fate, FFG games... they're all pretty well predicated on fairly high levels of player agency, which will make the kind of stuff the OP wants very difficult.

Risus would probably work well, or even Fudge.

[Anonymouswizard]

I was reading about some problems with railroalding storytelling dms and I started to wonder which rule system would be optimal for that kind of play.

I know a DM that is also a novelist and in his campaigns the players are more something like spectators (like Pippin and Merry on LotR) which a very hard time to really change things. Usually when a player try to accomplish something that can really have an impact, he set DC's at nearly impossible numbers, or nearly hopeless battles against overhwhelming npc's.

Don't get him wrong, it seems like his players enjoy his games because he has really impressive skills at telling a story. But this DM is always struggling because he "don't give a **** about the rules", he hates learning a new rule system. This makes him let his players pick the rules and then he tries to ignore this rules, specially if they allow the players narrative control.


This puts group narrative systems, like FATE, outside of the formula.

He wants to narrate, he wants player to listen, he wants the players to answer like the characters they are roleplaying (which the DM probably made anyways).

So why do you guys think? Can you recommend a system fro DM's like this guy?

Boy, time to do the 'break down into a list of requirements' trick. So we have:
-Permits/encourages GM railroading, potentially to an extreme extent.
-Rules light or rules intuitive.

The first one is going to be a big problem. Most modern games which encourage GM railroading either have a system for the PCs to give hints as to what they want stories to be about (Aspirations in Chronicles of Darkness spring to mind), or give players tools to influence the story in exchange (Fate, where players can take Compels in order to stock up Fate Points to either make the shot when it counts or ignore inconvenient compels). It sounds like the latter is definitely out (which is a shame), and the former generally assumes players get a lot of input into their characters.

It sounds like his GMing style is the same as the writing style of the oWoD authors, make everything be done by NPCs 20 times the power level of the party, and if the PCs try to avoid the plot punish them (maybe by docking their Humanity for stupid reasons).

So maybe he wants just a really basic homebrew system. It's not like homebrew systems are difficult to create (balance is another story), if I ever needed one I'd come up with say 5 Attributes (say Might, Agility, Resilience, Intellect, and Charm) and then let players pick DIY skills (although generating a list of 10-20 skills can be done in a few minutes), roll 2d6 and add stat+skill. I don't really see the resistance to creating them beyond losing out on the pretty art, one of the best games I played was a playtest of the GM's homebrew system he seeks to publish one day and involved the rules printed out and stapled into three sections ('rules', 'equipment', and 'you don't see the demon stuff').

Edit: If you're curious about examples, this DM several months ago invited me to a campaign for 5 players, he already has a several of characters in mind, and the rule system was star wars saga edition. The characters were a level 3 soldier, a level 9 scoundrel, a level 17 jedi consular (I can't remember the other two). Unfortunately I couldn't join that campaign, a shame, I was so curious to know how the hell that can work.

That's interesting. I wish I knew how problematic such power differences are (because depending on the group it can go from 'not at all' to 'no more bacon in the world').

Uhh... I dunno about WoD or Scion, but Exalted (both 2e and 3e) is one of the crunchiest systems I've ever played, and much more confusing and opaque than, say, 3.5. To say nothing of being one that gives more power to the player characters (not the players themselves, mind) than most, not less.

I'd say maybe something like Risus would be best; if the DM isn't going to bother with rules or allowing the players to influence things, there's no use proposing a game where rules matter or the players get explicit metagame powers.

I'm not personally very fond of the way WoD and Scion go about, I think there's too many categories for characters (especially oWoD). Attributes, Skills, Gear, Merits/Backgrounds, Powers, Aspirations in CofD, it's just a tad too (much this is a problem I have with many games, I'd rather d6 Space had a contacts skill or attribute rather than making me buy loads of ranks of contacts).

I'm going to second Risus as something he might like.

[daniel_ream]

If he just wants the players to listen to him tell a story, play The Extraordinary Adventures of Baron Munchausen.

[Studoku]

Suggest he joins a theatre group instead. Then he can have actors instead of players.

[exelsisxax]

Honestly, it seems like even a cooperative forum-based quest might be too much player agency for this guy.

Has he considered fanfiction.net yet? Because a mere vote seems to be out of line in his game.

[tensai_oni]

I'd suggest voting with your feet and having the DM stick to fanfiction, like some other people have sardonically suggested already.

But OP is not the DM's player, and it seems the players themselves enjoy this kind of game. Well, if it floats their boat, who am I to disagree?

And to answer OP's questions: I suggest a system that rather than player character agency, prioritizes and rewards roleplaying in a pre-established way. For example Chuubo's Wish-Granting Engine has you pick a personal storyline so to speak and earn points towards its completion. Sadly I don't know exact details as I only know the system second hand, but this is a direction worth looking into.

Alternatively you could try one of those niche systems, the ones that tend to go "players control various emotions that boil in the mind of a young starving artist during his forbidden romance with another man during the Spanish Civil War". Okay, maybe not with this exact premise unless that's what the DM wrote stories about.

[Tanarii]

I recommend Microsoft Word, so he can write stories without pesky players getting in the way.

So you need something that's a) Very very simple, and b) gives the players absolutely no agency?

Suggest he joins a theatre group instead. Then he can have actors instead of players.

Gold! I'm going to trot these out next time a DM or PC player starts talking about RPGs being about collaborative storytelling.

So.... I'd suggest 3.x/Pathfinder.

Sounds weird, right? But in a rules-light game, the whole point is that you're focusing on the decisions that the players make and not the minutae of the mechanics.

If you take away the decisions that the players make, you've gotta replace it with something... and 3.x/PF give the players a level of interesting choices between combat and character builds to keep them engaged.

That's an interesting idea. If the DM is willing to allow freedom of action within a combat encounter, and you use a system where it's generally assumed you'll win, or at least one where that's the case if it's run as Combat-as-Sport. He could happily keep his story & plot of rails, but give PCs freedom within each specific combat encounter as they see fit. But that'd require a DM that likes quite a lot of (or at least enough) combat encounters ... and this doesn't particularly sound like that kind of DM to me.

[Max_Killjoy]

I recommend Microsoft Word, so he can write stories without pesky players getting in the way.

So you need something that's a) Very very simple, and b) gives the players absolutely no agency?

It would probably help if we knew more what the players want out of playing with this DM. What is the benefit in doing this as an RPG rather than, say, reading his book?

If he just wants the players to listen to him tell a story, play The Extraordinary Adventures of Baron Munchausen.

Suggest he joins a theatre group instead. Then he can have actors instead of players.

Honestly, it seems like even a cooperative forum-based quest might be too much player agency for this guy.

Has he considered fanfiction.net yet? Because a mere vote seems to be out of line in his game.

Gold! I'm going to trot these out next time a DM or PC player starts talking about RPGs being about collaborative storytelling.

These replies pretty much have it covered.

What this GM wants isn't an RPG, it's a captive audience.

[Grod_The_Giant]

We're actually being kind of unfair to the DM, based on later information:

Oh no no, sorry maybe I didn't were clear enough.
He puts players inside the world of his novels, the story is already written, he actually loves to see players making weird ass decisions that he didn't think off on his stories.

But sometimes, players been players, will make things that really change the story. Then he asks for, usually a very high roll, I guess that's because, he then needs to adjust some writing.

"Okay with weird ass decisions, but won't let them derail the general thrust of the plot" is well within the bounds of standard DMing practice, I think. There's nothing wrong with a linear game if everyone's on board with it.

[tensai_oni]

Gold! I'm going to trot these out next time a DM or PC player starts talking about RPGs being about collaborative storytelling.

What? OP's situation is the exact opposite of collaborative storytelling so I have no idea where you are getting at.

[Uncle Pine]

I was reading about some problems with railroalding storytelling dms and I started to wonder which rule system would be optimal for that kind of play.

I know a DM that is also a novelist and in his campaigns the players are more something like spectators (like Pippin and Merry on LotR) which a very hard time to really change things. Usually when a player try to accomplish something that can really have an impact, he set DC's at nearly impossible numbers, or nearly hopeless battles against overhwhelming npc's.

Don't get him wrong, it seems like his players enjoy his games because he has really impressive skills at telling a story. But this DM is always struggling because he "don't give a **** about the rules", he hates learning a new rule system. This makes him let his players pick the rules and then he tries to ignore this rules, specially if they allow the players narrative control.


This puts group narrative systems, like FATE, outside of the formula.

He wants to narrate, he wants player to listen, he wants the players to answer like the characters they are roleplaying (which the DM probably made anyways).

So why do you guys think? Can you recommend a system fro DM's like this guy?

Edit: If you're curious about examples, this DM several months ago invited me to a campaign for 5 players, he already has a several of characters in mind, and the rule system was star wars saga edition. The characters were a level 3 soldier, a level 9 scoundrel, a level 17 jedi consular (I can't remember the other two). Unfortunately I couldn't join that campaign, a shame, I was so curious to know how the hell that can work.

This homebrew 2d6 gaming system I found today sounds like it'd fit your criteria. The entire rulebook of the game is 691 words, less than two pages.