Hriston
Dungeon Master of Middle-earth
No, it doesn't. You said, "Roleplaying is not the decision." The PHB says roleplaying is the decision. See how those two statements don't agree?
Here's a hint: "determining" is a synonym for deciding.
D&D 5E Come out and put yourself on the Gygax scale!
No, it doesn't. You said, "Roleplaying is not the decision." The PHB says roleplaying is the decision. See how those two statements don't agree?
Here's a hint: "determining" is a synonym for deciding.
TwoSix
Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer
I'm so mad you beat me to it!
Possibly more fitting for this forum:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNUnZgoUppM
Hriston
Dungeon Master of Middle-earth
I agree that story and mechanics are better factors to base your scale around than role-play and the can of worms that opens. This brings us back around to the problem of how to separate the mechanics from the story that results from them. To me, the mechanics are how events are imagined to be occurring in a story. Perhaps others who feel more inclined towards story than mechanics are more interested in exploring elements of character, situation, setting, and color, which to me isn't the actual story. The story is when things happen involving those elements, usually because the mechanics say they do.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Selective reading is selective. You don't get to post a definition that requires three parts and then claim that it's only one part.
Hriston
Dungeon Master of Middle-earth
What part is that?
EvanNave55
Explorer
Hmm, it's kind of hard to say based on how little I get to play but I'd say I range from about G2-G4 possibly averaging around 3.5?
However I get so few chances to actually play but still really like d&d so I end up reading these forums, the UAs reviews, etc. So much that a vast 90 some percent of the time I spend related to D&D is pure mechanics.
Sent from my XT1635-01 using EN World mobile app
However I get so few chances to actually play but still really like d&d so I end up reading these forums, the UAs reviews, etc. So much that a vast 90 some percent of the time I spend related to D&D is pure mechanics.
Sent from my XT1635-01 using EN World mobile app
Ratskinner
Adventurer
I'm not really sure how to answer, because I find it enjoyable to play both purely tactical/stategic games as well as those that are nearly purely storytelling.
However, I find "story" to be a poorly defined term here...
See, I don't think D&D is a story game (nor are most rpgs). This is not to say that stories don't happen within D&D, but stories also can happen when playing the sportsball. "Story" is how we humans make sense of the world, so whatever happens in the game, we can tell a story about it. While traditional rpgs like D&D provide a mechanical basis for deriving an imagined narrative, most do very little at all (mechanically) to create a "story" with a defined beginning, middle, and end. When it does happen, its either the result of a skilled DM "landing" his D&D ship well, a not-so-skilled DM fudging rolls or railroading, or random chance.
That's, I believe, the root of the "conflict" inherent in the G0-G6 ratings to which some of the other posters have objected. That is, mechanics and story don't have to be in opposition. For example, the creation of a (complete, but not great) story is necessary to even have the game Once Upon a Time function, similarly with Fiasco. And yet, within D&D and most traditional rpgs, the idea of mechanics being in conflict with the story is completely sensible to me. As far as I can tell, the preservation of story vs the mechanics is the sole reason to "fudge" die rolls. I don't see how "fudging" a card in Once Upon a Time or a scene in Fiasco is even possible, let alone necessary to preserve a story. This becomes particularly egregious, IME, for rpgs that try to address episodic properties like Star Trek with D&D-like mechanics. (Seriously, at the very least, games like that should have some kind of "escalation die" thing where you're stumbling around in the first act, okay in the second act, and rocking it for the third act to get things resolved.)
What most rpgs like D&D do provide is a framework upon which to string a narrative or explore a setting in a uniquely visceral way because we identify with our avatars in the gameworld. And honestly, that seems like plenty for most folks (me included, most of the time). YMMV, and all that. So, I don't intend what I wrote above as a sweeping indictment traditional rpgs, just an assessment. (Except for the Star Trek and similar property rpgs...those are all horrible
.)
However, I find "story" to be a poorly defined term here...
See, I don't think D&D is a story game (nor are most rpgs). This is not to say that stories don't happen within D&D, but stories also can happen when playing the sportsball. "Story" is how we humans make sense of the world, so whatever happens in the game, we can tell a story about it. While traditional rpgs like D&D provide a mechanical basis for deriving an imagined narrative, most do very little at all (mechanically) to create a "story" with a defined beginning, middle, and end. When it does happen, its either the result of a skilled DM "landing" his D&D ship well, a not-so-skilled DM fudging rolls or railroading, or random chance.
That's, I believe, the root of the "conflict" inherent in the G0-G6 ratings to which some of the other posters have objected. That is, mechanics and story don't have to be in opposition. For example, the creation of a (complete, but not great) story is necessary to even have the game Once Upon a Time function, similarly with Fiasco. And yet, within D&D and most traditional rpgs, the idea of mechanics being in conflict with the story is completely sensible to me. As far as I can tell, the preservation of story vs the mechanics is the sole reason to "fudge" die rolls. I don't see how "fudging" a card in Once Upon a Time or a scene in Fiasco is even possible, let alone necessary to preserve a story. This becomes particularly egregious, IME, for rpgs that try to address episodic properties like Star Trek with D&D-like mechanics. (Seriously, at the very least, games like that should have some kind of "escalation die" thing where you're stumbling around in the first act, okay in the second act, and rocking it for the third act to get things resolved.)
What most rpgs like D&D do provide is a framework upon which to string a narrative or explore a setting in a uniquely visceral way because we identify with our avatars in the gameworld. And honestly, that seems like plenty for most folks (me included, most of the time). YMMV, and all that. So, I don't intend what I wrote above as a sweeping indictment traditional rpgs, just an assessment. (Except for the Star Trek and similar property rpgs...those are all horrible
.)
Last edited:
rabindranath72
Explorer
I am a G2-G3, depending on the scenario and rules. I always keep in mind I am playing a game, first and foremost, so the rules are important insofar as they "enforce" a vision of the setting in virtue of the reality the help model.
I see both Story and Rules in a feedback loop, where the strength of the feedback paths is variable (and even within the same game system, there might be a different balance between the twos.)
I see both Story and Rules in a feedback loop, where the strength of the feedback paths is variable (and even within the same game system, there might be a different balance between the twos.)
Hriston
Dungeon Master of Middle-earth
[MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION], is your interpretation of the PHB definition of roleplaying that in each instance of role-play the player must make decisions about all three of the named ways the character can react to/interact with its environment, and if any one way is missing it is not roleplaying?
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
It is according to your quote.
It doesn't say that roleplaying is "...how your character thinks, acts OR talks.". It uses "and". That use of and means that it requires all three. Personally, I have a more relaxed view of what the range of roleplaying is, but 5e is apparently one true way.
Similar Threads
