The Evolution of Fantasy Role-Playing Games - Michael J. Tresca [66]
Gamebooks are noteworthy for contributing to the evolution of fantasy gaming because they made the transition from narrative tales like The Lord of the Rings to IF. The gamebook’s story is still largely guided by the author, and the rules are relatively simple, but the framework was established for a player’s interactivity with a fantasy world, whatever form it might take.
Because of the limitations of encyclopedic design, the only way to increase interactivity is to author huge amounts of content. This is largely impractical in gamebook format due to the obvious physical limitations of the book. It is less of a barrier in IF, but is still not a practical alternative due to the constraints of game development. The tradeoff is to limit the player’s choices to obvious paths, both to hedge the narrative and engage the player in such a way that it feels logical, creating agency (Mateas & Stern 2007:188). These narratives tend to be riddles in which the player “figures out” what the game creators determined is the best path forward.
Personalization
Like the computer role-playing games (CRPGs) that would eventually follow, the roles in gamebooks were extremely limited. The Fighting Fantasy gamebooks had but three stats: skill, stamina, and luck. This would later be codified and expanded, forming an introductory system to role-playing games suitable for group play. Nevertheless, the original gamebook was by design a solitary activity.
The gamebooks format limits what the player can do. The player makes certain key choices, and the results of those choices lead either to another choice (success) or the end of the game, usually the death of the character or worse (failure). This makes gamebooks challenging, but also requires repeated play-through to determine the best course of action. The more simplistic gamebooks had only one successful ending. Others had several alternative endings, all of which could be considered a success.
Gygax cites these sorts of “branching path” gamebooks as useful scenarios for novice gamers. Because of these strictly limited choices and absolute consequences, the simplified gamebook format provides the basis for a role-playing session that is much less open to chance (1989:106).
Risk
Unlike the more forgiving forms of fantasy gaming, IF can be extraordinarily harsh on players. Underlying Dungeons & Dragons, miniature wargames, CRPGs, and massive multiplayer online role-playing games is a statistical challenge. Combat challenges can be overcome through careful planning, strategy, and a little luck. By balancing a dizzying array of statistics, including race, class, and magic, players know that although they can’t always defeat a monster, they at least have a chance.
IF, on the other hand, is an either/or proposition. Although failure doesn’t always result in the death of the player’s character, it is not usually up to chance. Excluding the Fighting Fantasy–style gamebooks, IF is usually a series of riddles. Gamebooks involve picking the right path, where IF involves entering the correct keywords for the game’s parser. These limited choices with dire consequences can be extremely frustrating, but also equalizing. Just as authors use riddles to engage the reader, so choices made in IF are a challenge to the player’s—not the character’s—mind. There is no intelligence or wisdom roll to determine if a character makes the right choice, it’s up to the player to figure it out.
Monsters can still be slain, of course. Dragons, trolls, and dwarves are all capable of being defeated through the right circumstances in IF, even by violence. But the conflict is never down to chance alone. It’s all about making the right choices. This different form of conflict, although challenging, is also part of IF’s appeal. Players have a thorny relationship with their characters—on the one hand, they want him or her to