relia-robot

Trans married robot/doll

[Robot/doll/moth/slime/NHP]-girl. DGN-001. I like writing!

See post-cohost writing at https://reliarobot.dreamwidth.org/, on tumblr at https://www.tumblr.com/relia-robot-writes, or collected long-form pieces at https://reliarobot.itch.io/


You know, it's kind of interesting that a common piece of RPG advice I've heard is "show your players the barrel of the gun", meaning that you should showcase the threat they might face if they fail, whereas the classic piece of writing advice is "If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off."

Just, I don't know, strange that a satisfying story in an RPG might be seeing that "gun" and avoiding it entirely, versus common wisdom in storytelling saying that showcasing the "gun" and not having it actually do anything would be unsatisfying. Hazards of having your main characters also be your audience, I suppose?


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @relia-robot's post:

The specific formulation of Chekhov's gun sometimes leads people away from the general point that unnecessary detail can hurt narrative legibility. If you make a specific point of a gun being there, it should turn out relevant that it's there and a gun — in terms of an RPG, it introduces the threat of shooting and incites the players to care about preventing it!

...Having said that, RPGs often produce narrative as a byproduct, rather than consisting of it as a building material, and so have a rather different relationship to narrative coherence.

I think this is just a case of two different metaphors that don't really mix. The rpg advice is "make it clear to the players what the consequences are" (or at least how high the stakes are), where Chekhov's Gun is that when writing a story, "if you draw the audience's attention to something, it had better be important later"