[1st Draft] Understanding RPGs Part One

[mythusmage]

more like-

an activity where a hypothetical individual, whose attributes and qualities are frequently expressed numerically, is acted by an inividual or group through scenarios usually designed to test creative possibilities and system restraints.

More seriously.

A character's attributes etc. need not be quantified at all. They could be expressed qualitatively, as in Eden Studio's Over the Edge. It is also possible that one could assume a role where only how a person will act in a situation is known, but not his abilities. While this falls more under the heading of "acting" than the traditional RPG, it still, in my opinion, falls under the definition I presented above.

Besides which (now that I've really read your version), not all sessions need include situations where creativity plays a part. Nor need the system be tested. Matter of fact, the last comes more under the aegis of meta-gaming, which is a matter for later discussion.

 

[shilsen]

Re: Re: Re: [1st Draft] Understanding RPGs Part One

I must disagree. The creation of a collaborative story is not always a part of the RPG experience. It's not core in the way the other elements are. It is possible to play an RPG with no story, and so story cannot be a part of the foundation. This is something I will have to expand on. My thanks for pointing it out to me.

And I must disagree too It seems you're using a somewhat specialized definition of story here. If you use the term in a more general sense, Buttercup's definition works fine. If an RPG involves events of any kind, there's a story there. And as long as it involves more than one person (e.g. one GM and one player), it's collaborative. Hence, collaborative story.

 

[Buttercup]

Mythusmage, as shilsen said, it depends on your definition of 'story'. I would say that even in a game that is nothing but a dungeon crawl, a story is being created as the players move from point A to point B and beyond. It isn't a traditional story, but it is one nonetheless.

 

[herald]

[definition]A roleplaying game is a pastime where people assume the role of another person in an imaginary world, with a set of rules that regulate what is, and is not, possible in that imaginary world.[/definition]

[my defintion] A roleplaying game is a pastime where people assume the role of another persona in an fictionalized setting, with a set of rules that regulate what is, and is not, possible in that fictionalized setting.[/my definition]

Even if the fictionalized setting mirrors the real world, it doesn't change th fact that it is fictioanlized. Out comes are based on what the players decide to do. Not by a pre-aranged agreement, otherwise you are performing either a re-creation or performing a play.

I dismiss the term "world" because it's "wonky". It doesn't accuratly describe what is really being done.

After all, a game desn't even have to happen on a world at all.

 

[mythusmage]

Mythusmage, as shilsen said, it depends on your definition of 'story'. I would say that even in a game that is nothing but a dungeon crawl, a story is being created as the players move from point A to point B and beyond. It isn't a traditional story, but it is one nonetheless.

What you, and Shilsen are thinking of is a narrative. Which is similar to, but not necessarily the same as a story. A story is a structured narrative. What you get out of the typical RPG sessions is not always structured. If it has any, that structure has usually been added by the author.

 

[mythusmage]

[my defintion] A roleplaying game is a pastime where people assume the role of another persona in an fictionalized setting, with a set of rules that regulate what is, and is not, possible in that fictionalized setting.[/my definition]

(parts snipped)

You do have a point there. However, I must stop short of adopting the term "fictionalized". After all, the setting need not be a fictionalized version of anything, which is what your wording implies. So consider the core definition of what an RPG is to be:

[definition]A roleplaying game is a pastime where people assume the role of another person in an imaginary setting, with a set of rules that regulate what is, and is not, possible in that imaginary setting.[/definition]

You are right in that it need not be a complete world. It need only be complete enough. I thank you.

 

[Buttercup]

What you, and Shilsen are thinking of is a narrative. Which is similar to, but not necessarily the same as a story. A story is a structured narrative. What you get out of the typical RPG sessions is not always structured. If it has any, that structure has usually been added by the author.

Well then, how about this:

A roleplaying game is a passtime where a group of people assume the role of another person in an imaginary world, with a set of rules that regulate what is, and is not possible in that world, for the purpose of creating a collaborative fictional narrative.

 

[mythusmage]

To All Who Have Responded So Far

Just a little note to let you all know I appreciate your thoughts. While I don't always agree with you, you have pointed out areas in which I need to explain things better. In that you have been a great help. My thanks to you all.

 

[mythusmage]

Well then, how about this:

A roleplaying game is a passtime where a group of people assume the role of another person in an imaginary world, with a set of rules that regulate what is, and is not possible in that world, for the purpose of creating a collaborative fictional narrative.

Here we're getting into the why of RPGs. As in, why do people play them. There are many reasons. Sometimes it includes creating a cooperative narrative, but not always. Nor do I believe to be the central reason. But that is the subject of a later essay.

I must also add that while RPGs are usually played by groups of people, it need not be. An RPG can be played by as few as two, one to present the setting, the other to take on the role of someone in that setting. Again, this is really the property of a later topic, so I shan't say more.

 

[alsih2o]

Besides which (now that I've really read your version), not all sessions need include situations where creativity plays a part.

how can you include "imaginary" and "assumed role" and then say not all sessions need to include creativity?