So, I've decided that I hate roleplaying

[Herschel]

I'm with you....some nights. There are times when I'm really in to my character and others where I just want to kill stuff. I can tell what my character is doing, even speak "for/through" him, but I can't share my imagination, I can only try to evoke it in others. Some nights, that's just more effort than I feel up for.

 

[pemerton]

The OP basically said, "I'm tired of funny voices and 'walking through a Ren-Faire' type gaming sessions." The amount of "go play WoW/you're a hack 'n' slasher/D&D isn't for you" type answers really amaze me, and I wonder when talking in a funny voice while playacting out haggling over a bolt of silk began to equate with rpg'ing.

I had a similar reaction. I don't mind speaking in first person, but most of my players are more of the third-person inclination. It doesn't stop them playing their characters, either in combat or out of it.

And we certainly never have walking through fairs in our sessions, let along haggling over bolts of silk.

 

[Uder]

I find most wargames to be severely lacking in terms of what a character(or more specifically units) can do. In fact, I believe one of the reasons D&D gained so much popularity was that the characters could do more than just "move and shoot." I know you can do more than just that in most wargames nowadays, but none of them I know of come close to the amount of things you can have a character do in an RPG.

Most of them also have an equal chance of one side or the other winning, something RPGs generally don't. But you're right. D&D gained so much popularity partly because the things you could do with it expanded beyond simple combat moves - but this was quaintly classified as "role-playing" by the creators. I don't know where funny voices became a requirement, but some people are stuck on them.

Anyways wayne62682, if you want to just play one character, not have to role-play, not have to worry about house rules, not worry about other people role-playing in ways you don't like, and mostly if not always win the day... well, looking back at your OP:

So... what can I do? I've noticed that lately, I don't even have a desire to play RPGs because I want to avoid the roleplay except where absolutely necessary (or the occasional witty remark during combat, things like that), and as far as the combat goes I feel I'd rather be playing WoW because there's no "house rules" to muck things up because someone doesn't agree with the RAW.

Is there any hope for me, or are my days of RPGs over and I should just stick with WoW?

...I think sticking with WoW might be your best bet.


EDIT: For some insane reason I mixed up Leatherhead and the OP. Sorry about that to both of you.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Most of them also have an equal chance of one side or the other winning, something RPGs generally don't.

Generally speaking, winning and losing have less meaning in a game form without a defined end. A campaign can go on for as long as the players want to keep playing. As far as the odds of victory within individual engagements go, there will be a wide spread of victory odds from group to group depending on the desires of the group.

If I am interpreting the desires of the OP correctly, he wants the combat content in the game to interact with, and have meaning in the campaign and also for this type of activity to form the focus and backbone of the campaign.

I play WOW. WOW cannot deliver this. You can have your fill (and then some) of non-stop action but the context of that action has no bearing upon the game world. Monsters simply respawn, evil villains likewise along with the same range of goodies that they dropped the day before. The only meaningful roleplaying possible is with other players. The NPC's and the rest of the world cannot interact with your character beyond the limited programming.

There are many gamers who enjoy the high action style campaign that use a variety of systems to play them. It may seem impossible to find them but they are out there.

 

[Doug McCrae]

The only meaningful roleplaying possible is with other players. The NPC's and the rest of the world cannot interact with your character beyond the limited programming.

I think it's perfectly possible to roleplay in a single player PC game. I've done it. To me roleplaying in the narrow sense (not the sense of 'playing in a roleplaying game') is demonstrating character, ie personality, by means of word and deed.

In Morrowind (a sandbox crpg, so there's a wide choice of action) I had a character who would not steal, even though it really helps you get ahead in that game. I actually had quite a strong idea for this character's personality, it was a dark elf called Flame, who became an assassin, and I pictured her having a kind of lawful evil approach to life.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I think it's perfectly possible to roleplay in a single player PC game. I've done it. To me roleplaying in the narrow sense (not the sense of 'playing in a roleplaying game') is demonstrating character, ie personality, by means of word and deed.

In Morrowind (a sandbox crpg, so there's a wide choice of action) I had a character who would not steal, even though it really helps you get ahead in that game. I actually had quite a strong idea for this character's personality, it was a dark elf called Flame, who became an assassin, and I pictured the character having a kind of lawful evil approach to life.

You can certainly do this but it is still a one way data stream. The game environment as a whole won't respond to or recognize your words or deeds beyond the programming.

 

[Doug McCrae]

You can certainly do this but it is still a one way data stream. The game environment as a whole won't respond to or recognize your words or deeds beyond the programming.

Eh, we're always bound by rules. Whether it's the rules of a computer program or the rules of a ttrpg. In the case of a ttrpg there are many layers of rules - what the GM allows, what the other players want to do, 'realism'.

In fact I feel that the presence of other people is actually a far greater limitation on my freedom than a computer program. Many GMs don't allow evil PCs for example, so I wouldn't have been able to play Flame in such a game.

Morrowind btw has lots of mods available for it so I, a player, can even change the rules if I want. Could I do that in ttrpg if the GM said no? (And the GM probably would, most GMs like their rules as they are.)

 

[Nifft]

Morrowind btw has lots of mods available for it so I, a player, can even change the rules if I want. Could I do that in ttrpg if the GM said no? (And the GM probably would, most GMs like their rules as they are.)

You could, but if you did, if discovered it would go by the unflattering designation of "cheating".

You need to have all the people on the same page regarding the rules. Computers aren't people*, so you don't need to ask them before you modify the rules which the people expect.

Cheers, -- N

*) ... that you know of.

 

[Uder]

Generally speaking, winning and losing have less meaning in a game form without a defined end. A campaign can go on for as long as the players want to keep playing. As far as the odds of victory within individual engagements go, there will be a wide spread of victory odds from group to group depending on the desires of the group.

Okay. And...?

I'm just commenting because it seems a lot of RPG players have a bad reaction to wargames... and if you dig deep enough it's because the opponent is suddenly equal and the person who supposedly seeks tactical challenges doesn't really know what a tactical challenge is.

If I am interpreting the desires of the OP correctly, he wants the combat content in the game to interact with, and have meaning in the campaign and also for this type of activity to form the focus and backbone of the campaign.

He also seems to want to not have to engage with the game in the way other players find satisfying. They're not wrong to tell him they don't enjoy his style of play, just like he's not wrong to say he doesn't like talking in first person. I'm serious - he's asking if he should just hang it up and play WoW, and I'm leaning towards, "yes."

I play WOW. WOW cannot deliver this. You can have your fill (and then some) of non-stop action but the context of that action has no bearing upon the game world. Monsters simply respawn, evil villains likewise along with the same range of goodies that they dropped the day before. The only meaningful roleplaying possible is with other players. The NPC's and the rest of the world cannot interact with your character beyond the limited programming.

I 100% agree. I avoid MMO's for this and other reasons. I don't get the idea that the OP cares about the role-playing angle though, even going so far as to call role-players in MMO's "jerks."

There are many gamers who enjoy the high action style campaign that use a variety of systems to play them. It may seem impossible to find them but they are out there.

Even the action-only hacks I run have more role-playing than what wayne62682 seems to want. Looking for non-roleplaying fun in a role-playing game seems like setting yourself up for heartbreak.

 

[Oryan77]

And we certainly never have walking through fairs in our sessions, let along haggling over bolts of silk.

My players seem to like to roleplay with the merchants and roleplay the haggling. I don't mind it either as long as they are having fun. The thing is, it sometimes leads to some very fun & memorable moments...

Just 3 sessions ago, 2 PCs needed to buy thick jackets to avoid the cold winds of Pandemonium. The merchants prices were pretty high and they annoyed him with all their haggling, so he raised the prices even more. This pissed them off, so the Sorceress tried to steal a couple of them and got caught. She grabs the robes, the merchant lunges at her with a dagger, calls out for the guards, and all hell broke out. She yells to the other PCs that were not involved to meet her at "Ivory Downs" (an inside joke in reference to a location where a very funny situation happened in town just moments before) and she teleported away.

The good cleric paid the merchant more than enough for the stolen goods, shook his head in disappointment & apologized, and left the scene to meet everyone at "Ivory Downs".

So because they like to roleplay with merchants, they ended up in a situation that gave them something to talk about for the next few sessions. They loved it. If they didn't play out the "piddly" buying/selling routine, then this would never have happened.

But of course, if this roleplaying type of stuff bothers a person anyway, then I guess this type of situation still wouldn't be any fun. But this is the kind of stuff I enjoy about D&D and roleplaying. I find it much more entertaining than just entering a room, and attacking a monster over & over & over again. Although I do love attacking the monsters.