My Attempt to Define RPG's - RPG's aren't actually Games

[Hussar]

/snip

But there aren't scenario-based expectations. "The scenario" isn't a governing concept in how we're approaching the game. In the Prince Valiant game, if the player decides that the marital status of his PC is not interesting and shifts the focus onto something else - say, more detailed attention to training the young son on how to be a knight - well then that's where the focus of play would go and that wouldn't cause any issues. There's no sense of "changing scenarios".

/snip.

How is that not changing scenarios? You are no longer wooing the widow but are now doing something completely different. Of course it doesn't cause any issues. But, before you can do more detailed attention to training the young son how to be a knight, you MUST create something to play off of. Unless you're just sitting around talking about the code of chivalry without doing anything else, I suppose. But, wouldn't training involve sparring with an NPC? Which requires an NPC to be created BEFORE you can spar.

I'll have another go, and I'll strengthen my claim to try and provoke a response: I categorically deny that the Prince Valiant session I played on the weekend took the form of first create something, then play it out.

Prove it. There is absolutely no way you could play an RPG without first creating some sort of scenario - whether the scenario is being created by the players or a by a single GM, you CANNOT PLAY an RPG without creating material first. It simply isn't possible.

 

[Hussar]

[MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION], ok, you're saying that creating scenarios in D&D only references the rules. Let's see you do it. Create Strahd, not the mechical stuff, that's obviously part of the game, I mean the background and Ravenloft as a demi-plane ONLY referencing the rules of D&D. Let's see you create the backstory of a dead love that is reincarnated multiple times only to be murdered time and again by Strahd, but you are only allowed to reference the DMG. No outside material whatsoever.

Heck, an easier example. The Mad Hermit in Keep on the Borderlands lives outside the keep. Only referencing the Moldvay Basic rules, create that scenario of interacting with the Mad Hermit.

On and on and on. The only way to play D&D in any edition, is to bring in material that is not referenced in the rules. And it's something you have to do constantly. That's the POINT of playing an RPG. At least one of the points. The freedom to incorporate your own creativity into the game.

 

[Maxperson]

@Maxperson, ok, you're saying that creating scenarios in D&D only references the rules. Let's see you do it. Create Strahd, not the mechical stuff, that's obviously part of the game, I mean the background and Ravenloft as a demi-plane ONLY referencing the rules of D&D. Let's see you create the backstory of a dead love that is reincarnated multiple times only to be murdered time and again by Strahd, but you are only allowed to reference the DMG. No outside material whatsoever.

Easy peasy.

First I'll be using page 50 of the DMG which notes that there are horrific demiplanes in Shadowfell. I decide to use that rule to create a demiplane which I will name Ravenloft. Next I will use page 14 of the DMG and use the rues there to draw out a kingdom sized map of a country that I will call Barovia. I will enact the rules on page 15 to create the town which I will also call Barovia and then name the castle Ravenloft. I will use page 40 of the DMG to decide to make this place one of dark fantasy with vampires on the battlements. Now I need a ruler, and rulers are also mentioned in the DMG. Since I've used the rules for a dark fantasy environment, encounters are listed in the DMG which includes the MM, and page 89 of the DMG gives me the rules for creating NPCs, I create an NPC vampire and name him Strahd. I then give him traits as listed in the NPC section that amount to how the real Strahd acts.

Not only have I created Strahd using the rules of the DMG to give me the parameters to create him, I have also used the rules in the DMG to give me the parameters to create Barovia, and Ravenloft. There is no differece between using the parameters given by Pictionary to create Cagney and Lacey, and using the parameters given by the DMG to create the above. In both cases we are given the outline and we have leeway to create the specifics such as names and such.

Note: There are many other rules in there to help flesh things out even further. The DMG is all I need to create Ravenloft, though I do need the MM to get the stats for a vampire.

 

[Hussar]

Bzzz. Wrong. The demiplane of dread is not in the Shadowfell. Try again.

Note, you haven't given Strahd a single bit of background. Which is actually what I asked you to do. You need to have a NPC that constantly reincarnates as Strahd's love only to die again and again. Without a single caster being involved.

There's a lot more to Barovia than a map and a couple of NPC's.

 

[Maxperson]

Bzzz. Wrong. The demiplane of dread is not in the Shadowfell. Try again.

I think I see your problem. You haven't read the DMG so you are unaware that there are rules to help the DM create a scenario. I even gave you the page number. It's on page 50. Do you not own a DMG to look at that page?

Note, you haven't given Strahd a single bit of background. Which is actually what I asked you to do. You need to have a NPC that constantly reincarnates as Strahd's love only to die again and again. Without a single caster being involved.

I did. I pointed to the NPC creation rules which allow for personality and background. Writing the specifics of how he was created falls inside of that. Page 89 the rule says to give him an occupation and history. Pages 91-92 detail monsters as NPCs and also instruct you to give background. With those instructions, like when Pictionary instructs you to draw something to indicate Cagney and Lacey, the specific portions of his background fall under those rule instructions.

There's a lot more to Barovia than a map and a couple of NPC's.

All of which are covered by DMG rule instructions, suggestions and/or tables. The specifics of creations, just like the specifics of what you draw in Pictionary, are completely up to you.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

This argument can have no resolution, if you consider:

• Thoughts had by the DM (or player)
• Thoughts held by the DM, which they then decide to introduce to the game reality
• Thoughts held by the DM, which they write down, which are introduced to the game reality
• Thoughts which are articulated by the DM, fully embellished with a variety of possibilities contingent on player action, and introduced to the game reality
• Thoughts which someone else has had (e.g. a module), which are introduced to the game reality

Such thoughts might be prior to or during the game.

It seems as though the point at which “setup” can be said to occur is dependent on playstyle more than any objective metric. Whether players (as opposed to DMs) can or can’t be included in this setup – or how – is also dependent on playstyle.
In the final analysis, much of this thread is arguing about when the ideal becomes phenomenal; or when the epistemic becomes the ontic.

These are not easy questions to answer.

 

[pemerton]

How is that not changing scenarios? You are no longer wooing the widow but are now doing something completely different.

There never was any "wooing of the widow". I asked the player whether he was intending to do so, we worked out that his PC was widowed, and he indicated that he wasn't interested in any wooing.

I categorically deny that the Prince Valiant session I played on the weekend took the form of first create something, then play it out.

Prove it. There is absolutely no way you could play an RPG without first creating some sort of scenario

Because I can easily quote write-ups, I'll post examples from two other first sessions: one for Burning Wheel, one for Cortex+ Heroic Fantasy:

Posting as Thurong on rpg.net
I've been talking about BW as the system for our next campaign. One of the players had bought rulebooks and built a BW PC (a noble-born Rogue Wizard inspired by Alatar, one of Tolkien's blue wizards of the East). I had built a PC for another player to show him what the system was capable of - a spell-using necromancer ranger/assassin (hunter-wizard's apprentice-rogue wizard-bandit).

In our session today we were short a couple of players so played BW instead. As well as the two 5 LP humans, I quickly worked up a 4 LP elf for the 3rd player (a Citadel-born soldier-protector and sword-singer). Writing up beliefs took a little while. The rogue wizard, Jobe, had a relationship with his brother and rival. The ranger-assassin, Halika, had a relationship, also hostile with her mentor, and the player decided that was because it turned out she was being prepared by him to be sacrificed to a demon. It seemed to make sense that the two rival, evil mages should be one and the same, and each player wrote a belief around defeating him: in Jobe's case, preventing his transformation into a Balrog; in Halika's case, to gain revenge.

Each player also wrote up a "fate mine"-style belief: He who dares, wins for the sorcerer, and Stab them in the back for the assassin. And each also wrote up a immediate goal-oriented belief: I had pulled out my old Greyhawk material and told them they were starting in the town of Hardby, half-way between the forest (where the assassin had fled from) and the desert hills (where Jobe had been travelling), and so each came up with a belief around that: I'm not leaving Hardby without gaining some magical item to use against my brother and, for the assassin with starting Resources 0, I'm not leaving Hardby penniless.

Some instincts were written up too: the ones that (sort of) came into play were, for the mage, When I fall I cast Falconskin and, for the assassin, I draw my sword when startled. That was enough to get things going with those two, while the elf player finalised some skill choices and some belief and instincts of his own.

I started things in the Hardby market: Jobe was looking at the wares of a peddler of trinkets and souvenirs, to see if there was anything there that might be magical or useful for enchanting for the anticipated confrontation with his brother. Given that the brother is possessed by a demon, he was looking for something angelic. The peddler pointed out an angel feather that he had for sale, brought to him from the Bright Desert. Jobe (who has, as another instinct, to always use Second Sight), used Aura Reading to study the feather for magical traits. The roll was a failure, and so he noticed that it was Resistant to Fire (potentially useful in confronting a Balrog) but also cursed. (Ancient History was involved somehow here too, maybe as a FoRK into Aura Reading (? I can't really remember), establishing something about an ancient battle between angels and demons in the desert.)

<snip remainder of session recount.

I wrote up some PCs to run a Heroic Fantasy session.

<snip some info about mechanics>

The PCs were deliberately conceived so as to be suitable either for a Japanese or a Viking setting; when we played yesterday the players all voted for vikings, and so that's the way it went.

<snip PC descriptions>

After people chose their characters, and we voted on vikings over Japan, the next step was to work out some background. The PCs already had Distinctions and Milestones (that I'd written up, picking, choosing and revising from the Guide and various MHRP datafiles) but we needed some overall logic: and the swordthane needed a quest (one of his milestones) and the troll a puzzle (one of his milestones).

So it turned out like this: the Berserker (who has Religious Expert d8) had noticed an omen of trouble among the gods - strange patterns in the Northern Lights; and similar bad portents from the spirit world had led the normally solitary scout (Solitary Traveller distinction, and also Animal Spirit) to travel to the village to find companions; and the troll, a Dweller in the Mountain Roots, had also come to the surface to seek counsel and assistance in relation to the matter of the Dragon's Curse; and, realising a need for a mission, the village chieftain chose the noblest and most honourable swordthane of the village - the PC, naturally - to lead it.

And so the unlikely party of companions set out.

I'm not sure what the "official" practice is, but I tend to treat these briefing/start-up contexts as Transition Scenes, and so allow any player who wants to spend the initial Plot Point on a resource to do so. So the berserker started with a d6 Token of the Gods, while the swordthane spent a PP and added a d6 to the Doom Pool to have a d8 Steed derived from his Riding Expert.

Thus equipped, the group travelled to the north, gradually climbing through the foothills ever higher towards the snow-capped peaks. In spring and summer the more adventurous herders might be found here running their animals upon the pasture, but in the autumn there were no humans about.

Cresting a ridge and looking down into the valley below, they can see - at the base of the rise on the opposite side - a large steading. Very large indeed, as they approach it, with 15' walls, doors 10' high and 8' wide, etc. And with a terrible smell. (Scene distinctions: Large Steading, Reeks of Smoke and Worse.) After some discussion of whether or not giants are friends or foes, the swordthan decides to knock at the gates and seek permission to enter. Some dice rolls later and he has a d6 Invitation to Enter asset, and a giant (I used the Guide's Ogre datafile) opens the gate and invites him in.

Meanwhile (I can't quite remember the action order) the scout has climbed up onto the top of the pallisade, gaining an Overview of the Steading asset, and the troll has remembered tales of Loge the giant chieftain, gaining a Knowledge of Loge asset. And the berserker - who has the Deeds, Not Words milestone which grants 1 XP when he acts on impulse - charged through the open gate at the giant, inflicting d12 physical stress.

But the swordthane - who was hoping to learn more about his quest - used his Defender SFX to take the physical stress onto himself (in the fiction, stepping between giant and berserker and grabbing hold of the latter's axe mid-chop). And the berserker - whose player was happily taking 3 XP for being rebuked by an ally for his violence - calmed down.

The next action cycle took place in the main hall of the steading, into which the PCs were led by the giant at the gate. I drew heavily on the G1 thematic here - all but one of the players was familiar with it. And I got to add in my third scene distinction - Great Wolves under the trestle tables and gnawing on bones at the sides of the hall.

I'm not going to remember all the details of this one, but highlights included: the swordthane opening up negotations with Loge, the giant chief, including - in response to a demand for tribute - offering up the steed as a gift; the scout, after successfully parlaying his Overview of the Steading asset into a Giant Ox in the Barn asset, leading the ox into the hall and trying to trade it for the return of the horse, and failing (despite the giant chief's Slow distinction counting as a d4), and subsequently avoiding being eaten (a stepped-up Put in Mouth complication, as per the Giant datafile in the Guide) only by wedging the giant's mouth open with his knife (a heavily PP-pumped reaction roll); and the swordthane successfully opening a d6 Social resource (based on his Social Expertise) in the form of a giant shaman in the hall, who agreed that the troubles plaguing the human lands were afflicting the giants too, and so they should help one another.

In the end, the PCs succeeded in stepping up their Persuaded to Help complication on Loge above d12, and so he relented and decided to befriend them rather than try and eat them.

<snip remainder of session recount>

Both these sessions started with PCs, some goals and motivations, and a bit of framing (the trinket peddler; the giant steading). There was no scenario being "played through". From the descriptions of the set-up - which are not missing anything - you can't even tell what happened next, let alone what had happened by the end of the scenario: you can't predict the NPCs, or the locations, or the actions. Nor could have I, or the players.

before you can do more detailed attention to training the young son how to be a knight, you MUST create something to play off of.

"Something to play off" is not a scenario. It need not be anything more than a simple game element, which in this instance already existed - the son.

"Playing off" is just another way of saying engaging the fiction. It doesn't have to mean playing through a scenario.

[MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION]: I don't know why you're trying to persuade me that playing a RPG involves creating fiction. I think I was the first person to make that point in my thread. But creating fiction need not be preparing for play - as you say - nor need it be using the game creation engine to create a game - as [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] says.

It can just be playing a RPG.

 

[Lanefan]

I don't know why you're trying to persuade me that playing a RPG involves creating fiction. I think I was the first person to make that point in my thread. But creating fiction need not be preparing for play

You can't play an RPG without some sort of backdrop to play against, and creation of that backdrop is a part of set-up. Also, on-the-fly creation is every bit as much a part of set-up as ahead-of-time creation is, it's just done at a different time.

I here repost your BW write-up from above:

In our session today we were short a couple of players so played BW instead. As well as the two 5 LP humans, I quickly worked up a 4 LP elf for the 3rd player (a Citadel-born soldier-protector and sword-singer). Writing up beliefs took a little while. The rogue wizard, Jobe, had a relationship with his brother and rival. The ranger-assassin, Halika, had a relationship, also hostile with her mentor, and the player decided that was because it turned out she was being prepared by him to be sacrificed to a demon. It seemed to make sense that the two rival, evil mages should be one and the same, and each player wrote a belief around defeating him: in Jobe's case, preventing his transformation into a Balrog; in Halika's case, to gain revenge.

Each player also wrote up a "fate mine"-style belief: He who dares, wins for the sorcerer, and Stab them in the back for the assassin. And each also wrote up a immediate goal-oriented belief: I had pulled out my old Greyhawk material and told them they were starting in the town of Hardby, half-way between the forest (where the assassin had fled from) and the desert hills (where Jobe had been travelling), and so each came up with a belief around that: I'm not leaving Hardby without gaining some magical item to use against my brother and, for the assassin with starting Resources 0, I'm not leaving Hardby penniless.

Some instincts were written up too: the ones that (sort of) came into play were, for the mage, When I fall I cast Falconskin and, for the assassin, I draw my sword when startled. That was enough to get things going with those two, while the elf player finalised some skill choices and some belief and instincts of his own.

I started things in the Hardby market: Jobe was looking at the wares of a peddler of trinkets and souvenirs, to see if there was anything there that might be magical or useful for enchanting for the anticipated confrontation with his brother. Given that the brother is possessed by a demon, he was looking for something angelic. The peddler pointed out an angel feather that he had for sale, brought to him from the Bright Desert. Jobe (who has, as another instinct, to always use Second Sight), used Aura Reading to study the feather for magical traits. The roll was a failure, and so he noticed that it was Resistant to Fire (potentially useful in confronting a Balrog) but also cursed. (Ancient History was involved somehow here too, maybe as a FoRK into Aura Reading (? I can't really remember), establishing something about an ancient battle between angels and demons in the desert.)

All the bits I've bolded come under set-up, along with the existence of the peddler and his wares. Using Greyhawk as your setting does a lot of the creation and set-up for you, though you still have to narrate what they see.

Note that the set-up piece involving the battle between angels and demons etc. comes after play has already begun.

It can just be playing a RPG.

And some of what you're lumping in under play is actually part of set-up.

Lanefan

 

[Hussar]

And, just to leap frog off of [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION], I'd say that in an RPG, unlike other games, set-up requires the creation of elements in order to be able to play. You don't need to create anything beforehand to play Pictionary - all you need is a writing surface, a writing implement and some words, none of which are "made up".

Granted, you do create something through play in Pictionary, but, nothing is created before hand and nothing needs to be created beforehand.

This is why I reject [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION]'s definition of setup being all equal. It's not. Very, very few board games require you to create something, completely independent of the mechanics of the game, in order to play.

 

[Maxperson]

And, just to leap frog off of [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION], I'd say that in an RPG, unlike other games, set-up requires the creation of elements in order to be able to play. You don't need to create anything beforehand to play Pictionary - all you need is a writing surface, a writing implement and some words, none of which are "made up".

Granted, you do create something through play in Pictionary, but, nothing is created before hand and nothing needs to be created beforehand.

This is why I reject [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION]'s definition of setup being all equal. It's not. Very, very few board games require you to create something, completely independent of the mechanics of the game, in order to play.

Reject it all you want, creation is still game set-up, as is placing pieces on a board and shuffling cards. The only major difference is the scope that scenario set-up entails. You really should be focusing on the game set-up goals, rather than try to show that creation is somehow not set-up, or that it is somehow outside of the game.

As for Pictionary, that you create during game play just means that it's more like [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]'s style of RPG play, not that it isn't like any RPGs.