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

[F4NBOY]

Oh please, just keep the PHB roleplaying-free! A page with roleplaying "tips" is one less page with precious rules. Much of roleplaying depends on the setting you play the game. Why waste lots of pages teaching us how to roleplay an Elf if in my setting elves don't care about woods? Just wasted pages. Make it as generical as possible.
Roleplaying depends too much on personal taste too, and things like that should be kept as flexible and opened as possible.

RP-FREE!

What about asking WOTC to make a Roleplaying Guide or whatever? If you want to learn how to roleplay that much, that's a great idea.
But the fact is, IME, most people that keep asking for more RL in PHB know pretty well how to roleplay in D&D. They don't need "tips" or "encouragement", all they want is to feel that their style of playing is somehow "official" and that everybody plays it "correctly"(the way they like and think it's right).

 

[Khairn]

But the fact is, IME, most people that keep asking for more RL in PHB know pretty well how to roleplay in D&D. They don't need "tips" or "encouragement", all they want is to feel that their style of playing is somehow "official" and that everybody plays it "correctly"(the way they like and think it's right).

So everyone who is looking for more RP in the rules is doing so because they want to feel "official" and want everyone else to play the game "correctly" ?

Wow. And here I was thinking that I voiced my opinion because I think that RP is a really fun part of the game.

 

[F4NBOY]

So everyone who is looking for more RP in the rules is doing so because they want to feel "official" and want everyone else to play the game "correctly" ?

No.
Read it again: "IME, most people".
Most=many, with exceptions.
Everyone=all, no exceptions.
BTW, IME=real life experience, not the boards.
Sorry for the confusion.

Wow. And here I was thinking that I voiced my opinion because I think that RP is a really fun part of the game

That's what i've said. You want more RP in PHB because you think it's fun, and it is for you, certainly.

But a book with very little RP content, "encouragement" and no mechanics with roleplaying attached to them is fun for the people that doens't enjoy roleplaying, and it's not an obstacle for the RP aficionados that wish to add their particular style to the game.

The contrary to all that, IME, is not true:

A book with lots of RP content, "encouragement" and mechanics with roleplaying attached to them is fun for the RP aficionados that wish to add their particular style to the game, but probably will be an obstacle for the people that doens't enjoy roleplaying.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Yep, I want my "style of playing" validated by the D&D designers...I'd love them to mention and explain a bit what roleplaying is about in the core books, so the claim that they sell a "roleplaying game" is actually true. Weird me, huh? And all because I found the few paragraphs of advice Frank Mentzer put into the Basic Set PHB and DMG very interesting and helpful in understanding WHAT I was using all those weird rules and dice for in the first place, and what kind of situations could come up during the (back then) "standard" game.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

I want a decent amount of fluff text and about a page of basic RP advice.

 

[Dinkeldog]

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.

What I want to know is what should WOTC do if they wanted to produce fluff? If WOTC made a "Complete ROLE Player" what would be in it? What should be in it?

Usually when I'm looking for fluff books, I'm looking for things like political backgrounds and personal stories of people in a campaign setting or that I can drop into any campaign setting (I do tend to homebrew). It sometimes annoys me that this type of fluff isn't provided, because it can really help me as a DM to cut my prep time and as a player to help give me a better immersive feel.

I've found that, "This is how you should roleplay," doesn't work very well because we all tend to roleplay differently, even within the groups I've played with. Sometimes it's adopting a persona. Sometimes it's playing what you would be as, say, a halfling rogue. Sometimes it's adding some catch-phrases to ground a dwarf fighter-rogue. And sometimes it's a coloring the gamist approaches that many of my players have taken.

 

[Cabled]

A tried and tried formula. I'm all for it.

You don't need rules for role-playing. Every group will incorporate as much or as little as deemed necessary.

I'm actually going to disagree with that last part here. Players and DM's with thier roots farther back and some experience will do this. New players attracted to the game from MMO's may well have no clue without some great examples and pointed "how-to's". It's important to remember that while most of us here at ENWorld have been doing this for quite awhile, it's the new players that this game needs, and the game needs to teach them how to play in all it's aspects.

 

[KarinsDad]

WotC does not need another book on RPing. Hero Builder's Guidebook is sufficient.

But, it wouldn't hurt for WotC to put maybe a half dozen pages in the DMG explaining the basic concepts. "Make it non-official suggestions", but don't delve into a lot of campaign specific details like "Elves like to hang out in trees". Just get the basic ideas across and let people know that what works for them is great and that what works for one player or group might not neccesarily work for others.

Hidden in the back of my bookcases (I have them two books deep), there are probably 2 or 3 "How to Roleplay" books from over the decades. They aren't exactly in the front because the concept is pretty easy to explain and comprehend.

A simple explanation in the DMG would suffice.

 

[BryonD]

Wow. And here I was thinking that I voiced my opinion because I think that RP is a really fun part of the game.

Are you suggesting a connection between RP (or at least RP being a fun part of the game) and a need for mechanical RP stuff in the book? Because I think that would be a big mistake.

 

[The Little Raven]

It's a rulebook.

There are no real rules for roleplaying, since it's unique to the situation and the people involved. For a roleplaying section in a book to be helpful, it would have to be based on the experience of the writers, and thus would just be subjective essays on the topic. White Wolf has released a few books that are collections of essays by the developers, and they are indeed helpful for newer players (and even some older ones)... however, I don't think that is necessarily the way to go about it, especially when they have D&D Insider for developer commentary and such.