To be clear: I'm using "plot" as shorthand for "one or more predetermined events that will come to pass, regardless of fictional circumstances or the actions of the player's characters."

I got into TTRPGs from freeform roleplaying over forums and IRC and such. Something I stumbled on in the process is just how much TTRPG communities seem to dislike them, or even see them as inherently bad! Discussions about plots tend to attract a lot of finger wagging! Even TTRPGs that lean towards the lighter, more collaborative storytelling-y side of things tend to emphasize finding out what happens in the moment rather than plotting it out in advance. I've been recommended to D&D-centric communities before, but even those seem to be gradually adopting a "prep situations, not plots" viewpoint.

By contrast, most freeform roleplaying communities seem ambivalent to plots. Preparing plots is by no means universal! I'd hesistate to even call it a standard or common practice! But it's not at all rare to see ads openly saying things like "I want to roleplay a story where X, Y, and Z will happen" or discussions on how to make something like that happen in practice. Most of the guidance I follow for running plotted TTRPGs comes from, ironically enough, freeform roleplaying communities and my time in them.

I already know a lot of reasons why any given individual might enjoy or hate plots! I'm mainly interested in knowing why this broader cultural divide exists or seems to exist. My initial thoughts going into TTRPGs would be that the systemization and rules would make people lean more towards predetermined outcomes, but apparently not! I know TTRPG communities and especially freeform roleplaying communities are fragmented and decentralized, but I wanted to see if anyone with more experience or knowledge might have some ideas.

I think a big difference is that many roleplaying games use randomizers to adjudicate conflicts in the fiction. That naturally leads to a belief that, while a particular plot point may be a desirable outcome, there is no real way to ensure that it does happen (barring fiat).

My first guess is to do with freedom to play. In a ttrpg you are constrained by the rules and the world but not by the direction. In the kind of freeform game you're talking about you're constrained by the direction (the predetermined plot) and the world but not by rules. But maybe there are more constraints on freeform play in the moment than I realise?

Oh, yeah! I keep forgetting how common randomizers tend to be in TTRPGs. This is one of the other big hurdles I had to try and get over. Mostly in a "learning to tolerate randomness and random outcomes" kinda way.

A lot of RPGs are about procedural storytelling, where player actions and dice rolls can greatly alter the outcome of events. The story being told is about how the PCs deal with the obstacles in front of them and what the outcomes of those struggles are.

It's not a pure story telling exercise like freeform roleplaying is. However lot of modules or prewritten adventures are a bit like that with more or less determined beginnings, middles and ends.

"I want to roleplay a story where X, Y, and Z will happen"

TTRPG community wouldn't call that a plot. Majority of pre-made adventures have elements of the story that will almost certainly happen, unless everyone dies first. So I think you're arguing a bit academically here. But the big difference, in sofar as there is one, is that TTRPGs generally focus on character agency rather than narrative input. You play a character and express that character's input. Some TTRPGs blur the line. PbtA systems often have more narrative input outside character agency, for instance, but it's still the norm for the agency of the character to be central.

I agree.

Tbh, something I found a LOT of people who mostly do story games adore is planning varius beats out with the group.

Us all agreeing and then me weaving them into one of the many varius modules I already have or finding one that does work with it.

I think the reason is pretty simple:
We play games to make choices and activly influence/determine how things develop.

Having a fixed outcome, no matter what one does is antithetical to the idea of playing. Those things might work in video games and game books, but tabletop rpgs are played to make choices, to have agency, to use ones creative muscles.

In TTRPGs, the mentality basically came from "we fight dungeon monsters for loot and level ups", to "the GM prepares a story for us to play", to "we want to shape the story with our own actions".

That being said: I think it's a niche discussion. If you look at like 90% of commercially published adventures/modules/whatever-it's-called you'll find that they very much revolve around plots. Sandboxes are available, but hardly the norm. And I assume the publishers know their customers and figured out what people are going to buy.

In a tabletop game, the “game” part is largely using tools like dice, tokens, currency, cards, random tables, limited choices, specific rituals, move triggers, etc. to cause changes in the “game state.” That is usually considered more important to the fun than the guarantee of a particular scene being played out. In some games, genre emulation that will likely lead to certain scenes is rewarded, for example through Fate’s Compels, dnd’s Inspiration, and some PBTA moves; this doesn’t guarantee certain scenes though and has varying amount of impact. (Dnd Inspiration always had very low impact in my dnd experiences.)

Now, that being said, in some games, a plot in part or whole is determined first, and then within that plot, the game is about how that comes to be, what is transformed in the process, creating elements together, what is lost or gained to get to the predetermined part, expressing feelings about that plot, etc. I would say that games like Cantrip, Wanderhome, Yazeba’s Bed and Breakfast, Follow: A New Fellowship, and Our Wandering Home are games with this vibe.

This is an interesting point!

Freeform roleplaying does tend to constrain itself in one way or another. A truly, 100% freeform roleplaying session is just wildly unrestrained creativity. Some people thrive on that! But I think most people need something.

(Not all freeform roleplaying sessions have a predetermined plot! Some of them create a setting to play in and have a story emerge similar to how more emergent, sandbox TTRPGs work. They just lack any kind of concrete, explicit rules.)

I guess freeform roleplaying communities tend to see "restraining myself by following a plot" and "restraining myself to a a detailed setting" as more or less equal.

And, it's worth noting that the TTRPGs I run and play it tend to have very concrete rules and a predetermined plot, but the setting is very wishy-washy and more open to interpretation.

I think it has to do with TTRPGs having mechanics to randomoze/decide outcomes. In freeform RP, the outcome is going to be an arbitrary judgement call anyway, so it might as well be plotted in advance. But in TTRPGs, you have a mean to determine this outcome, it's not arbitrary anymore! So people think they should leave outcome determination to the mechanics instead. Having plots in TTRPG can be done acceptably, mind you, but then you have to 1) announce it in advance, 2) either not engage the mechanics or engage them for something else/tangential (e.g. There is no way you can win this battle, but maybe you could save the prince). Mostly it fails when a GM wants to have the uncertainty and thrill of the randomized roll... But also wants that roll to only go a certain way. Or they want the players to feel like their choices matter, but they also want the players to make a specific choice or want a specific thing to happen. You can't both leave impactful choices to chance/players and have pre-determined outcomes, you have to pick one. And be honest about it.

There can be, it depends on the venue and format. I had about 5-10 rules when I ran freeform rp forum games, some of which are still applicable to pbp ttrpg campaigns, such as, “don’t tell other players how their PC feels or acts.”

Well, rules create a structure too easily broken by free form. Free form essentially becomes 1 on 1 campaigns

I agree. A phrase I have heard often in many tabletop spaces is “the dice have a story to tell.”

When you introduce a randomized system for judging conflicts, there is an inherent surrender of your ability to pick certain outcomes. Many systems introduce meta currencies to allow players and GMs to more easily steer towards the outcomes they want and mitigate this surrender, however, fundamentally (without fiat) your hands are tied. If the roll of the dice declares that you succeed, you succeed, if it declares you failed, you failed. It doesn’t matter whether or not it was essential to the plot that a success or failure happened, the dice have as much authorial ability as the GM and players do.