Overcompensation and RPGs
Two posts in one night? Aiiieeee!
But seriously, something came up that reminded me of a question I wanted to pose to those of you who read this:
What, to you, makes a roleplaying game?
I'm not looking for some textbook "any game in which you act out a role" unless that's really all that is important about it to you. When you play an RPG, what do you expect? What element of the game do you miss if it's not there? ... And so on.
But seriously, something came up that reminded me of a question I wanted to pose to those of you who read this:
What, to you, makes a roleplaying game?
I'm not looking for some textbook "any game in which you act out a role" unless that's really all that is important about it to you. When you play an RPG, what do you expect? What element of the game do you miss if it's not there? ... And so on.
I think I mentioned this some time ago in my own journal, but I'll re-iterate here. In an RPG, while I am looking for escapism, I also look for the game to make sense and have internal consistancy. I want the mechanics to support the setting, rather than hinder it. I want an environment that makes sense, and can sustain itself internally without the players having to go too far to suspend disbelief. Basically, I want a 'world', and I want the world to be believable. Shadowrun is one of my favourite worlds, because the setting is deep and detailed, and the mechanics support everything within it (except for Anchoring: I'm pissed off with how the changed it from 2nd to 3rd Edition). I enjoy Legend of the Five Rings, for much the same reason, and the mechanics for it are simpler, since complications are not needed. Games that try to enforce 'balance' through the mechanics piss me off. I seriously think that what happens in the game should simply happen, the rules should not try to enforce a restriction to it just because of something like balance. Thus, in a lot of ways, D&D 3E pisses me off to no end in that matter. I like the game, really, but there are just some things that make me angry about it -- a serious step back from 2nd Edition. Basically, a game with lots of options for the players to choose from, which allow them to make nearly anything they wish inside the setting, and with flexability so that the characters can grow, while the setting itself is deep and well-thought-out. That's what I like in an RPG.
ReplyDeleteClose... but not quite what I was asking. ;) You're defining what you want in an RPG... or what your ideal RPG is. My question is: What *defines* an RPG in your mind?
ReplyDeleteHrm, what I miss in an RPG if it's not there... What I expect is a story, one either with an overarcing plot that is made by the DM or made up of 'episodes' that can concentrate a bit on singal characters for their growth and advancement in their story. Hell, it's great if there's both.
ReplyDeleteDefinition of a Role-playing game to me: A fictional or mostly fictional imaginary setting where a group of people can join in pretending to be people who they aren't, and one individual tkae sthe role of challenging the others. Often their are rules used by this one arbiter, but not always. After the game is done, the individuals can continue with their real lives.
ReplyDeletePart of what brought this to mind was your recent post. Judging from that, part of what you see as defining in an RPG is character growth/development - something you didn't include in your answer here. ;) So, as an example, *could* you be happy with an RPG in which characters don't learn new abilities/skills/etc?
ReplyDeletePlot and character growth. 'kay.
ReplyDeletePretty basic. No emphasis on story or characterization, but you do bring up the issue of challenges. If there's no challenge, you don't have much of a game, do you?
ReplyDeletewas that a sufficient answer ? ;)
ReplyDelete*chuckle* If that is wholly what makes an RPG in your estimation. You tell me.
ReplyDeleteChallenge (conflict) is what will drive the story, character arc(s), etc. Therefore, I conclude that the Cracking Proper RPG is the fun-and-games version of having the shit beaten out of you by a 7th grade English textbook! :-D
ReplyDeleteWhen I first pondered this question, I was looking at it from a computer game standpoint. That's actually why I wanted to ask for others' opinions. I'm trying to figure out how much different it is, or what I may be missing. The computer/console game criteria seem to be something like: -Challenge/Conflict: As I commented before, if there's no challenge to overcome, there's really no game to begin with. -Plot: There must be a story/plotline, cliche or not. Often, the story is central to the experience. -Character Development: The character(s) you control must grow in some way, whether this is a level-based system (Final Fantasy) or simply gaining skills/abilities as you progress (Deus Ex). -Interaction: You, through your character(s), have interactions with NPCs in the world (even if your main character seems silent). The more sophisticated applications give you alterations to the storyline based on what you do/say to others, but often the changes are basic or just an illusion due to the difficulty in scripting alternate paths. So, am I missing anything there? Do you feel these apply to tabletop games, or is the list different there?
ReplyDeleteSelf-determination. The characters must have an impact on the story in some way and make a difference. Consider this -- the 'original' CRPGs did not have much of this... they told a story, you beat things up, but the ending was more or less foretold, and as such, they weren't recognized really as an 'RPG'. Curse of the Azure Bonds, Pool of Darkness, etc, those kind of things, were just 'games', rather than 'CRPGs', which is a more recent phenomenon. Now-a-days, a CRPG allows for self-determination and usually has multiple endings or events based on your decisions and actions. As such, in an RPG, your actions must have an impact.
ReplyDeleteWell... from a CRPG standpoint, that may be an ideal, but it's not a requirement. The old "gold box" games *were* considered RPGs (at least in the circles I was in). Plus some of the "classic" CRPGs have basically unchanging storylines. Example? The Final Fantasy series. I suppose you could argue that the characters *did* have an impact, but it was scripted - nothing the player did changed the end result. From a non-electronic standpoint, let me respond with a question: If a group of people get together, make characters, and "roleplay" through a quest that is simple and linear without shifting the envisioned outcome, did they not play an RPG then?
ReplyDeleteThat would depend, really. If I felt my character made a difference, that our group's decisions and actions actually had an impact, I would say yes. However, if it was railroaded, everything was more or less pre-determined, and in the end, 'anybody could have done this', while it might be roleplaying, it would be very, very poor roleplaying. Or, as when I was at a CanGames 1E AD&D sitting, and we went towards the ruined temble, I asked, 'what is my motivation for even going into this temple that nobody has survived?' That's just it. Without the reason, motivation, and feeling that our group is 'different' and can make a difference, there's very little motivation, since we don't make an impact on the setting.
ReplyDeleteHeh. And I could debate with you ad nauseum - as usual. ;) But again, I'm shooting for what makes an RPG, not what makes an RPG good, or what makes the experience of playing an RPG with any given group good. So is the ability to affect the course of the story a requirement?
ReplyDeleteI imagine so, yes.
ReplyDeleteIn my mind, which is a little rusty on the subject, I expect an RPG to challenge me not through memorization of the rules, or complicated die-systems, but through allowing a world or quest to develop and be explored (in fewer words, not hindered by the rules, no matter how high the stack of books). Any game in which characters are held back, or game play can be significantly delayed by an argument over obscure rules mentioned in one of twenty books isn't worth it. I roll, D/GM responds. I turn left. D/GM puts a big pit trap there. I have more than enough rules, regulations, statutes, codes, orders, and books on the like at my job; I don't want to relax with the same. I would also put forth that the best games I have been a part of have been epic conquests. Not sure if these opinions are what you're looking for, but that's my .02$.
ReplyDelete