Trying to Create a Satisfying Roleplaying Experience

Having finally thought through what I personally enjoy about the roleplaying experience, it leads me to an odd place where I don't seem to quite fit in the established categories. So I'll walk through my thought process and see if anyone can make any constructive suggestions.


The traditional roleplaying experience includes the roles of player and GM, with the GM having most of the control, preparing the situation in advance and presumably having a thorough understanding of the rules. The players react to the situation presented to them within the rules of the game system. D&D still works that way, and GURPS as written works that way, as do many others.


Indie games are more story-oriented, and often distribute the traditional narrative powers of the GM. Some of them dispense with the GM altogether, relying on rules to keep the situation under some kind of control rather than any judgement on the part of a single individual. Players often share narrative privilege and the group as a whole ultimately decides the direction of the story.


To date, I've usually applied the traditional model, bent hard toward story rather than combat, and I often bend or even completely ignore rules if I think it makes the story more entertaining. This sometimes irritates the heck out of the more rules-oriented players, and I can't say that they're unjustified in reacting that way. Indie games sometimes annoy me because they're set up in such a way that the rules matter so much that nobody has the power to bend those rules when it's not creating a good story. Granted, the rules are usually very well written and tend to result in a good story, but I've also played in many indie games where I found myself handcuffed by those rules, unable to take the story in a more satisfying direction.

Thinking this through, what it boils down to is that I have to admit that I really don't want any more rules than absolutely necessary, which is where Fluid came from. The traditional model tends to draw players who like long and detailed fight scenes, which bore the crap out of me. Indie games tend to draw more story-oriented players, but those players also have expectations that rules will be followed as written and that they will have far more control over story direction than in the traditional model.

At the end of the day, what I really want is serious player input on where they want to go, but ultimate authorial control over the big picture, which is somewhere in between the two models. I know that ultimate authorial control is selfish, but I often find collective storytelling too lacking in cohesiveness to be really satisfying. A benevolent dictatorship seems more functional than a crowd milling around almost at random. As in music or movies, you tend to get the best creative result when there is an overall vision guiding good creative input from others. The rules are supposed to give you that cohesiveness in indie games, but I'm finding that often isn't the case.

The problem is that the middle ground I occupy seems to be going away at game conventions. The community seems to be polarizing. Traditional players and indie players both don't entirely want what I want, and it's becoming harder for me to draw players. I've moved toward the indie camp, but get the sense that what I do isn't satisfying to them because there's too much GM control, and I fully understand why.

Writing fiction might be a better option for me creatively, but that lacks the performance aspect, interactivity, and immediate feedback that I find so appealing in roleplaying. Does anyone have any suggestions?