Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one who doesn't care about numbers...

[Tequila Sunrise]

I was expressing an opinion, of course, but to be a little more specific: I meant that, IMO, the spirit of RPG play is fundamentally different than that of board, card or many video games and that spirit is "perpendicular to" (i.e. not at cross purposes with, but not aligned with either) the kind of meta numbers analysis that pervades those other sorts of games.

You are right that ttrpgs are in many ways fundamentally different from pure strategy games, and even digital rpgs. At the same time though, D&D isn't a freeform rpg or like the rule-less cowboys & indians games some of us played as kids. It has rules involving numbers, and they influence gameplay even when we're not thinking or talking about them.

I personally like talking numbers on D&D forums so that I can focus on the story during game prep and game day. I like talking about setting and story on the forums in certain contexts; just about any Planescape thread will catch my interest, for example, and I have strong opinions on topics like paladins and healing magic. But topics about which class best represents which fictional character, or what WotC did to FR this time, or how to role play a 0-level gnomish squire? Boooring!

So I guess what I'm saying is: Talk about what you like to talk about, because there are people who like talking about the same things, even if numbers seem to dominate discussion.

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

I want to address this here, just as an example, and perhaps something of an explanation for why I don't "care" about the numbers. The way I view the game and milieu, there is no requirement for "a" fighter to be the best at fighting. See, the definition of the fighter is not "the best at fighting" but rather "the guy who straps on steel to face down monsters and magic for fortune and glory." There is no requirement for him to be the best at fighting so long as he fulfills his descriptive or "fluff" role. more to the point, the player is choosing a fighter because he wants to be the guy that straps on steel to take on magic and monsters for fortune and glory. If the player wants to be the best at fighting, that player may well choose a fighter, but also might choose a barbarian or warlock or whatever else to get there. But even "best at fighting" -- again, IMO -- is a descriptive term for the character in the world, not the sheet on the table. The PC may well seek to be, or believe him/herself to be, the very best fighter of them all, but only by pitting steel against all comers would the PC ever really prove to be The Best.

I am in agreement with this.

Also, something else I much prefer to numbers discussions - anecdotes from the table. Funny stories about what happened on game night. Sharing the shared experienced. I like to hear people's stories about how they took on the Temple of Elemental Evil and barely made out alive. I also like to hear stories about how Bob mispronounced Blibdoolpoolp and everyone laughed so hard they cried.

Edit: I should add that I don't object to numbers discussions at all. I have no issue with anyone focusing on what they like about the game. I just wish there were a few more folks in my and Reynard's general category.

 

[Starfox]

I want to address this here, just as an example, and perhaps something of an explanation for why I don't "care" about the numbers...

...but only by pitting steel against all comers would the PC ever really prove to be The Best.

Doesn't this mean you DO care about the numbers? After all, if the numbers (and hence game experience) tell the fighter he sucks, he could never achieve the role-playing goal.

 

[Manbearcat]

Often when I read discussions online about D&D -- whether it is stuff about the newly revealed tidbit for 5E, or about the Good Old Days of OD&D -- it seems to be dominated by issues of numbers. When folks discuss the relative value of playing a fighter versus a mage, or about monsters or spells, or even about trying to bribe a guard or seduce an NPC, the only thing that matters is what the numbers involved are.And i have to say, I just don't care.

The thing of it is pretty simply distilled down to this. Interaction at a D&D table is pretty much going to be one of three things:

1) GM says yes to player proposal.

2) Player deploys fiat power (typically spellcasting in any edition besides 4th and now 5th with Backgrounds).

3) Task/Conflict resolution must be mediated via rolling the dice.

That 3 there. That is where "the numbers matter." And they matter big time in a game like D&D where the stakes are often (but not always) "death to your dude and his/her pals" or "game over." Even when the stakes aren't "death to your dude and his/her pals", they can be enormously important (a parlay that will dictate the outcome of a kingdom or the successful rescue or death of an NPC that is important to you).

Numbers matter. They matter to players and they certainly matter to me as a GM.

 

[TwoSix]

Numbers matter. They matter to players and they certainly matter to me as a GM.

Absolutely. And in the message board context, numbers are measurable and easily derived, which makes them great debate fodder. There's only so much you can say about various gaming anecdotes where the discussion doesn't boil down to either "I disagree" or "Cool story, bro".

 

[ExploderWizard]

Numbers are only as important as they relate to actual play. If the numbers on your sheet are more important than what you choose to do in a given situation at the table, it is easy to see why one can become obsessed with analyzing them. I prefer that the most important thing in a tabletop rpg be "what do you do now?" rather than " What is your modifier?"

If decisions in-game matter less than those made out of game, then the appeal of the numbers becomes self evident. After all, if my character cannot survive without adequate numbers in key areas, then making sure I have them will be an important priority. Sadly, it also indicates a system that likely values and rewards such analysis over creativity.

Thus OD&D is especially awesome. You can start out 18's down the line and your character can die just as quickly as one with a 12 as the highest stat if you play as if your head were planted firmly up your posterior. It is very relaxing to roll up a character and just play knowing that if the player next to you goes on a hot streak with the dice and gets godlike stats, you won't feel like you are playing a henchmen just because of that. Play can focus on what's happening and what you decide to do instead of the numbers.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It is very relaxing to roll up a character and just play knowing that if the player next to you goes on a hot streak with the dice and gets godlike stats, you won't feel like you are playing a henchmen just because of that. Play can focus on what's happening and what you decide to do instead of the numbers.

Or you could just play a system where you don't have to roll stats... and get considerably more relaxation because there's also no chance you'll have complete crap for stats and/or be unable to qualify for the class you wanted to play.

If decisions in-game matter less than those made out of game, then the appeal of the numbers becomes self evident. After all, if my character cannot survive without adequate numbers in key areas, then making sure I have them will be an important priority. Sadly, it also indicates a system that likely values and rewards such analysis over creativity.

Choice of class certainly matters an awful lot in all editions of D&D, and is an out-of-game decision, so that is something D&D has to live with, I guess.

Also, bolded bit is rather wild and hairy unsupported assertion. I'm sure that's "Just your opinion maaaaan", because it definitely isn't a fact.

I prefer that the most important thing in a tabletop rpg be "what do you do now?" rather than " What is your modifier?"

Talking of facts and opinion, are you claming that there's any RPG, in the entire world, where "what is your modifier" is more important than "what do you do now". It's certainly not remotely true in 4E, or 2E, or RC D&D - or any other RPG I can think of. Do you disagree? I'd like to hear some specifics, if so.

 

[Reynard]

Also, bolded bit is rather wild and hairy unsupported assertion. I'm sure that's "Just your opinion maaaaan", because it definitely isn't a fact.

Also, numbers analysis is a form of creativity. I don't mean to suggest with my OP that caring about numbers is bad, it is just that it always seems to be the thing that gets talked about. See the current L&L thread for a good example of what I mean.

Talking of facts and opinion, are you claming that there's any RPG, in the entire world, where "what is your modifier" is more important than "what do you do now". It's certainly not remotely true in 4E, or 2E, or RC D&D - or any other RPG I can think of. Do you disagree? I'd like to hear some specifics, if so.

This definitely happens, but it has less to do with the game being played than the context, I think. Specifically, in very linear adventures, especially most organized play like scenarios, "what do you do now?" is almost irrelevant. There's only one thing to do; the question is moot. Therefore, "What's you modifier" is the only question that really matters. But, again, that can be true regardless if you are playing OD&D, 4E, Shadowrun or any other traditional RPG.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Or you could just play a system where you don't have to roll stats... and get considerably more relaxation because there's also no chance you'll have complete crap for stats and/or be unable to qualify for the class you wanted to play.

Well that's just it. Define complete crap? I can roll an OD&D character 3d6 in order AND play whatever class I want regardless of the stats. If someone rolls a better stat than I do for a class prime requisite then they might get a bonus to earned XP and level up a bit faster ( OH NOES!!!)

Choice of class certainly matters an awful lot in all editions of D&D, and is an out-of-game decision, so that is something D&D has to live with, I guess.

It certainly does. What the numbers are in contrast, don't have to mean much at all.

Talking of facts and opinion, are you claming that there's any RPG, in the entire world, where "what is your modifier" is more important than "what do you do now". It's certainly not remotely true in 4E, or 2E, or RC D&D - or any other RPG I can think of. Do you disagree? I'd like to hear some specifics, if so.

3E, 3.5E, 4E

I call these the keeping up with the Jones' editions. If you do not allocate your stats/choose your powers & feats, "correctly" you will suck next to someone who does their due diligence on the numbers.

Why?

Because the systems themselves reward such analysis via escalating DCs and defenses. It is simply because the systems are designed to challenge the construct building abilities of the player over any other. 4E lessened the traps and made the path broad and easier to follow but the underlying theme was still there. This along with the attitude toward action resolution which was, if there isn't a die roll then nothing is really happening produced a game that was less interesting for me.

 

[ephemeron]

It seems to me that number-crunching rules analysis and character optimization are sub-hobbies under the umbrella of gaming, just like the worldbuilding and improv-ish acting that I'm more into.

All the sub-hobbies are valid, but they appeal to people differently, and each forum draws its own crowd.