Emergent Player-Driven Narrative in Blades in the Dark and Dungeons & Dragons : A Comparative Study

Sammanfattning: This paper presents a comparative study on two Tabletop Roleplaying Games, Dungeons & Dragons and Blades in the Dark. This paper takes a look at the narrative differences within the two systems. More specifically investigate if Blades in the Dark is more playerdriven than Dungeons & Dragons. The two tested as closely as possible and will be compared with each other. This is a close reading on the rules and player agency rather than a one-on-one comparison. The comparisons were made regarding the mechanics and narrative differences within the systems rather than quality of the story. This study was conducted by running two sessions, one for each system, played by separate groups with the same game scenario and premise. Meaning that the background for both games, character and plot for the session were the same. Comparisons were made by observing player decisions, situations that arose and the influence that the gamemasters had on the game. It was found that there is a clear difference between the two systems, this difference regarding whether the players were reacting to the gamemaster, or the other way round. In Dungeons & Dragons, it was observed that the players reacted and acted according to what the gamemaster explained and played out, whereas in Blades in the Dark it appeared to be the opposite. Here we found that it was the Gamemaster who was reactive to the players instead. The paper concluded that Blades in the Dark is the more player-driven system. This short study could later be built upon and used by game developers to keep in mind and plan their future game systems around. Taking these observations on emergent narrative in Tabletop Role-playing Games into account can be used to create more player-centric and player-driven games. Meaning that the players are more in influence and decisions to make in the story and game.