What Do You Think Of As "Modern TTRPG Mechanics"?

[Crimson Longinus]

Is it controversial?

Like the basic structure of RPG is that a GM describes the situation, the players describe what their characters do and the GM describes how it affects the situation. Like sure there are "rules" in a sense who's job it is to say stuff about what, but those are more like "rules" of improv theatre than rigid rules of game like chess. They are really not "mechanics." And yeah, almost every RPG has more rules than this, but that basic structure does not require such, it is merely moulded and aided by it. So RPG is not defined by its rules in same way than most game are. Like if you remove rules from chess, there is no chess, but RPG can exist and its core experience is intact in such a bare-bones form; it is not dependent on the rules.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Is it controversial?

Like the basic structure of RPG is that a GM describes the situation, the players describe what their characters do and the GM describes how it affects the situation. Like sure there are "rules" in a sense who's job it is to say stuff about what, but those are more like "rules" of improv theatre than rigid rules of game like chess. They are really not "mechanics." And yeah, almost every RPG has more rules than this, but that basic structure does not require such, it is merely moulded and aided by it. So RPG is not defined by its rules in same way than most game are. Like if you remove rules from chess, there is no chess, but RPG can exist and its core experience is intact in such a bare-bones form; it is not dependent on the rules.

I don't know. Without rules, you certainly still have role-playing, but I'm not convinced you have game. I don't think you actually have an RPG without rules, and if you do, it's not one I would want to play.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I don't know. Without rules, you certainly still have role-playing, but I'm not convinced you have game. I don't think you actually have an RPG without rules, and if you do, it's not one I would want to play.

"game" is a vague term. I would still call it a game, given that I would call a LARP a game too, and those often have basically no rules.

 

[Micah Sweet]

"game" is a vague term. I would still call it a game, given that I would call a LARP a game too, and those often have basically no rules.

I wouldn't call a LARP without rules (beyond safety) a game. Agree to disagree. Games aren't games to me without rules.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I wouldn't call a LARP without rules (beyond safety) a game. Agree to disagree. Games aren't games to me without rules.

Well, people commonly refer such activity as a game. But if we cannot agree what defines a game, we certainly are in good company. It has been debated for centuries without clear results.

In any case, I stand by my assertion that the core activity of RPGs in not really defined by the rules and they are not games in the same way than chess is a game.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yeah. The core element of RPG play is collaborative storytelling, and it does not really require much rules. And the goal of the game is not "to win" using rules optimally. Sure, that can be part of the gameplay, but it really is not central to what RPGs essentially are. So I think the rules being basically an optional extra and tools to help with your main goal makes them fundamentally different than a game such as chess.

Though I have to note how "optional" they are is very much in the eye of the beholder.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Is it controversial?

See my post.

Without some rules and resolution as far as I'm concerned, its not a roleplaying game, its just freeform roleplaying that happens to potentially be directed by a GM. I'm not automatically hostile to that, but I don't consider it the same thing.

 

[Thomas Shey]

"game" is a vague term. I would still call it a game, given that I would call a LARP a game too, and those often have basically no rules.

The ones completely lacking in rules I wouldn't call a game either.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Well, people commonly refer such activity as a game. But if we cannot agree what defines a game, we certainly are in good company. It has been debated for centuries without clear results.

In any case, I stand by my assertion that the core activity of RPGs in not really defined by the rules and they are not games in the same way than chess is a game.

I agree regarding the second part of this, but not the first.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well, people commonly refer such activity as a game. But if we cannot agree what defines a game, we certainly are in good company. It has been debated for centuries without clear results.

In any case, I stand by my assertion that the core activity of RPGs in not really defined by the rules and they are not games in the same way than chess is a game.

See, a big part of our difference here is that I do not see the core activity of RPGs being collaborative storytelling. Instead I see RPGs as a way to create and experience a consistent imaginary world through the lens of a creature or creatures within it, moderated by mechanics designed to model said world and all the features in it. Hopefully that world is interesting, and features situations that my character can interact with in a fun way, but the setting and the interaction are to me the central activity of RPGs.