D&D 4E 4E Rules first Role-Play second?

[Hussar]

Combat is going to happen in each and every D&D game. But not every session. Yeah we all get excited about crushing the bad guys but sometimes the non-violent theft of an item, the seduction of a noble, or the recruitment of an army to defeat the dark lord can be just as fun (or more so if you ask some of the guys I game with).

Sure the books should help you with the number crunching and details. But that doesn't make a character! The best part of D&D is YOU the PLAYER make a character that is an active part of the STORY told by you DM. You have the hero role of Aragon. You solve the mystery like Brother Cadfael. You learn the secrets behind your origins like Harry Potter. You out wit your rivals like Captain Jack Sparrow. The game is a lot more than kill the Orc for its 7 silver pieces and move on. If you just kill things and move on boredom will set in (might take awhile but it will).

OTOH, many of us started out with killing that orc for its 7 sp and did that for quite a while. We had a blast doing so. Then, slowly, as we started exploring other parts of the game, parts that weren't so well defined, we started getting into the whole role play thing as well.

Why do people seem to think that someone new to the game should be an expert roleplayer out of the box? What's wrong with starting off killing stuff and taking its loot and then learning all those other good parts later? Killing and looting is fun y'know.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

OTOH, many of us started out with killing that orc for its 7 sp and did that for quite a while. We had a blast doing so. Then, slowly, as we started exploring other parts of the game, parts that weren't so well defined, we started getting into the whole role play thing as well.

Why do people seem to think that someone new to the game should be an expert roleplayer out of the box? What's wrong with starting off killing stuff and taking its loot and then learning all those other good parts later? Killing and looting is fun y'know.

I don't. Killing and looting is tremendous fun. Even when it's done to your party mates. Especially then, sometimes. But it would also be nice if a new player wouldn't have to turn to other products in order to get some hints about what "roleplaying" can also mean, or hope that one of his fellow gamers has a better insight into it, but could simply turn the pages of his PHB to page xx and find some advice and hints about what other ways to roleplay there are, too.

 

[Hussar]

I don't. Killing and looting is tremendous fun. Even when it's done to your party mates. Especially then, sometimes. But it would also be nice if a new player wouldn't have to turn to other products in order to get some hints about what "roleplaying" can also mean, or hope that one of his fellow gamers has a better insight into it, but could simply turn the pages of his PHB to page xx and find some advice and hints about what other ways to roleplay there are, too.

Really, why? This isn't 1981. You'd need to be crawling out from under a pretty large rock not to have some idea of what a role playing game consists of, considering how often the technique is used in schools, at businesses and computer gaming as well. Sure, it made sense way back when to outline what role play could be, because no one had any idea what it meant.

Now, not so much. I'm thinking that even a younger player (early teen or so) has a fairly solid grip on what role playing consists of.

 

[D.Shaffer]

Now, not so much. I'm thinking that even a younger player (early teen or so) has a fairly solid grip on what role playing consists of.

The same young players who usually have CPRGs as their first example of an RPG? I think a quick introduction to 'What is Role Play' is still warranted.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Really, why? This isn't 1981. You'd need to be crawling out from under a pretty large rock not to have some idea of what a role playing game consists of, considering how often the technique is used in schools, at businesses and computer gaming as well. Sure, it made sense way back when to outline what role play could be, because no one had any idea what it meant.

Now, not so much. I'm thinking that even a younger player (early teen or so) has a fairly solid grip on what role playing consists of.

Uh-huh...no offense, but that's maybe the case where you live. I can assure you that this is not so where I'm at. From where I stand, most people still don't have a clue what roleplaying games are about, and how many different angles to roleplay exist. If anything, they have a very skewed image of what they know of video games and CRPGs...and that's anything but helpful.

Apart from that, it's the same argument that is used for other "changes" in 4E...if you try to attract new players to the game, you don't tell them "Hey, you most likely already know what roleplaying is, here's just the rules framework for it." Likewise you don't tell them "If you want to get a deeper understanding of what roleplaying is about, ask one of the many experienced roleplayers around you". You tell them "Go to chapter xx in your PHB and take a good look around." Why? Because you are trying to sell a complete roleplaying game, not just the rules half of it.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

That's a very good point. WOTC produces lots of feats, prestige classes, and other crunch because people buy it. If people were shelling out large amounts of money to buy fluff books then WOTC would be making those.

I'd argue theres a significant difference between a fluff oriented book (Lords of Madness, various world Source books) and a book that tells you how to role play.

I cant imagine anything resulting in more backlash than a game telling you how you should act and portray your character.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I'd argue theres a significant difference between a fluff oriented book (Lords of Madness, various world Source books) and a book that tells you how to role play.

I cant imagine anything resulting in more backlash than a game telling you how you should act and portray your character.

Despite the fact that a significant majority of the non-D&D RPGs on the market today, including those produced by what by all accounts the second- or third- most successful company in the industry, White Wolf, have rather extensive roleplaying advice and make it one of their main selling points?

While this has causes some backlash from a certain segment of, say it with me, PLAYERS WHO ARE ALMOST GUARANTEED TO BUY THE PRODUCT ANYWAY, it has apparently appealed to a significant number of new players.

I think the presence of rp advice (and, ideally, actual mechanical support for it via the social combat, stunting and XP rules) can only help bring in still more new players.

 

[The_Gneech]

Really, why? This isn't 1981. You'd need to be crawling out from under a pretty large rock not to have some idea of what a role playing game consists of, considering how often the technique is used in schools, at businesses and computer gaming as well. Sure, it made sense way back when to outline what role play could be, because no one had any idea what it meant.

Now, not so much. I'm thinking that even a younger player (early teen or so) has a fairly solid grip on what role playing consists of.

New kids are crawling out from under rocks being born all the time. I would argue that a sidebar or two or even a "sample play session" (no doubt involving the cleric being bitten by a monstrous spider and the rogue getting gobbled up by ghouls) is never wasted space.

Even at my powergameyest (and I can be pretty powergamey when the mood strikes me), I feel that the crunch should support the fluff, not the other way around.

And as far as "created as a beer-and-pretzelsey" game goes, that's as may be, but even in the sample play session I alluded to, the "party caller" said things like, "Light your torch, good cleric, so we may see what's in the water." Not exactly Shakespeare, but still very narrativey by contemporary standards.

-The Gneech

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Despite the fact that a significant majority of the non-D&D RPGs on the market today, including those produced by what by all accounts the second- or third- most successful company in the industry, White Wolf, have rather extensive roleplaying advice and make it one of their main selling points?

I guess I should more fully explain myself. I think theres a difference in the Players Handbook, and a Vampire book. The vampire book kind of presumes a certain type of game, and more importantly, kind of servces double duty as a setting book. Knowing how the various clans generally perceive one another is incredibly helpful (though I'd say that falls into the realm of fluff vs. rp how-to). I think the advice in something like Heroes of Horrors was well placed, since thats a book also aimed at running a certain style. Its mainly that the PHB kind of needs to be rather generic, since its the system backbone. Any RP advice would need to be so as well.

On the other hand, I think a few pages devoted to certain meta game topics could be handy. General advice on how to make a character that is appropriate for a type of game or gruop, advice on how to cut down on inner party conflicts etc could be generic enough to be worthy of inclusion. I think many group arguments could have been circumvented with a simple discussion pre-game that "Hey, we're going to run a heroic game... Bob could you maybe rethink your mercenary assassin" or "Everyone else has made morally ambiguous characters... Ted that paladin unwilling to compromise any of his scruples is kind of an odd fit for this group".

There was some good advice in the DMG 2 on running for various types of players that I think many new DM's should read. So I suppose I should revise my position somewhat.

What I wouldnt want to see is what we've been handed in stuff like the Complete series, with large chunks of it devoted to how to play specific archetypes, in some cases right down to spell memorization. Maybe its just me, but I've found that kind of talks down at you at times, and thats what I'd liek to avoid.

I think the presence of rp advice (and, ideally, actual mechanical support for it via the social combat, stunting and XP rules) can only help bring in still more new players.

I'm definately a fan of improved social resolution, but I'd lump that in a different area than How To RP advice.

 

[BryonD]

New kids are crawling out from under rocks being born all the time. I would argue that a sidebar or two or even a "sample play session" (no doubt involving the cleric being bitten by a monstrous spider and the rogue getting gobbled up by ghouls) is never wasted space.

There will always be room in the PH for a nice chunk of advice and a basic description of the concept. Though not a lot more than that, I just don't accept the idea that there are that many kids that are honestly interested in RPGs and yet have never played cowboys and indians or pinned a towel around their neck and pretended to be Superman. If they can do that at 5 they can grasp the idea of pretending to be a wizard at 12. I'm just not willing to look down my nose at people and claim this ideas might be beyond them.)

The DMG is another matter. Being able to RP easily is one thing. Being able to support and encourage it is another. (And rapidly changing hats in the DM seat can also be an issue) So real advice there is no doubt of value.

But all that is non-mechanical. To further stretch the pasta analogy, the absolute worst thing the designers can do is start telling me which kind of pasta I need.