Are Video Games Ruining Your Role-playing?

I love RPG video games, but they might be causing some sub-optimal habits in our tabletop role playing. So what’s a GM to do about it?


Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

It's Dangerous to Go Alone. Take This (Advice)!​

Way back when, video games and RPGs weren’t too different. The video games often focused on killing stuff and getting treasure and so did plenty of dungeon modules. But it wasn’t very long before tabletop games moved into more narrative and character driven play which video games had a hard time following. While some video games like Dragon Age have tried to mirror role playing, you still only get a selection of options in interaction.

Nowadays, tabletop gaming has branched well beyond the elements that have been automated in video games. For players coming from video games, those elements can cause a biased approach to tabletop gaming that might make the game less fun. Below are some examples of how "video game creep" can affect tabletop RPG play styles and how to address them.

The Plot Will Happen Regardless​

While no one likes an interminable planning session, they do at least remind us that the players are not just participating but driving the story. In a video game the story happens whether you like it or not. You just need to keep putting one foot in front of the other and the story will happen regardless. So the bad habit here is a desire of players to ‘just move on’ assuming the GM will just give the plot to them as they go. This often comes unstuck in an investigative RPG where the players need to plan and consider, but it can cause problems in any game. Just pushing ahead will often clue in the bad guys about what is going on. Worse, without some effort to uncover clues, the players will just be floundering, wondering why the plot hasn’t miraculously appeared.

To get players out of this mode the GM might have be initially be a bit more obvious with clues. Almost to the point of putting a helpful flashing icon over them so the players can find them. The key here is to get them looking for clues and trying to understand the plot rather than just assuming inaction will solve the adventure regardless. Once players remember the clues will not come to them they will start trying to find them again.

“Nothing Is Too Much for Us!”​

With the option to save and return to a tough problem, video games offer the idea that any character can potentially tackle anything that is thrown at them. After all, the hero of a video game is a pregenerated character with all the right skills (or at least the means of acquiring them). This is also coupled with the fact that if the video game throws an army of zombies at you, then you expect to be able to fight them off. No problem is insoluble as long as you are prepared to persevere.

While perseverance isn’t a bad trait, sometimes the player characters shouldn't attempt to face all obstacles with brute force. The GM might have put them against insurmountable odds because they should be retreating. They assume putting 100 zombies in the room will make it pretty clear the way is blocked, then get surprised when the PCs draw swords and dive in. Then they are even more confused when the PCs accuse them of killing off their characters by putting too many monsters in, when no one forced them to fight them.

It is hard for some players to realise that retreat is also an option. But if you are used to facing and defeating supposedly insurmountable odds it is unlikely you’ll think of making a run for it. This attitude might also give some players the idea that any character can do anything leading to some spotlight hogging when they try to perform actions clearly suited better to other characters.

At this point the GM can only remind them retreat is an option, or that the thief should probably have first call on the lock picking. If they ignore that warning then they’ll eventually get the message after losing a couple more characters.

“I’m Always the Hero!”​

In many games the player characters are heroes, or at least people destined for some sort of greatness. But in a video game you are usually the chosen hero of the entire universe. You are the master elite agent at the top of their game. The problem is that in any group game not everyone can be the star all the time. So it can lead to a bit of spotlight hogging, with no one wanting to be the sidekick.

That is usually just something they can be trained out of with the GM shifting the spotlight to make sure everyone gets a fair crack. But being the greatest of all heroes all the time may mean the players won’t be satisfied with anything less. There are some good adventures to be had at low level, or to build up a great hero, and starting at the very top can miss all that. So, players ranking at the lower level of power should be reminded they have to build themselves up. Although there is nothing wrong with playing your game at a very high level if the group want big characters and bigger challenges.

Resistance Is Futile​

One of the things RPGs can do that video games can’t is let you go anywhere. If there is a door blocking your path, in an RPG you can pick the lock, cut a hole in it, even jump over it, where in a video game it remains unopened. If you get used to this concept it can lead to players thinking the opposite of the insurmountable odds problem. A locked door means they should give up and try another route or look for an access card. They start to think that like a video game there are places they are meant to go and meant not to go, and that they should recognise that and not fight it.

This might apply to any number of problems, where the GM is offering a challenge but the players just think that means they shouldn’t persevere. Worse, the players might think they need a key to open the door and will search for as long as it takes to find one, never imagining they might smash the door down.

This is a tough problem to get past as it means the GM needs to offer more options and clues to the players. If this doesn’t remind them they can try other things, then that opens up the following issue. So the GM should try and coax more options out of the players and make a point of rewarding more lateral thinking in their part.

“I’m Waiting for Options”​

While there may be several ways to defeat a problem, and the players know this, they might not be used to thinking of them for themselves. They will expect the GM to suggest several ways to defeat any obstacle or interact with an NPC rather than think of them themselves. This is easy to spot as the GM will notice that any clues or suggestions they make are always followed rather than taken as a helpful starting point.

The simple answer is to stop offering options and let the players think of them themselves. After all, RPGs are not multiple choice, they should be infinite choice. So the GM might also make a point of throwing the question back to the players and ask them what they will do about the encounter. The GM might offer clues if asked, but they should try and keep the focus on the players thinking of a way through rather than giving them clues.

Gaming in Every Medium​

The issues above aren’t a problem if that is how you all want to play. But they do put a lot of pressure on the GM to hand out all the answers and takes away the player’s agency to interact and influence the story. So it is worth taking a look at your group's gaming habits, particularly new players, and reminding them that although video game RPGs and tabletop RPG have a lot in common, they should be played differently.
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

Andrew Peregrine

Andrew Peregrine

log in or register to remove this ad


Moderator Emeritus
I think that the problem is more that d&d is basically "90% combat" as another thread puts it. Bob the 3 int 4 cha Barbarian insisting on "I'm a roleplayer" roleplaying" around the deficit their character was built with is both ignoring the deficit in their spreadsheet of a character as well as invading a niche that someone else actually made choices to build for being good at. Bob would be livid if the gm decLared that the monsters were roleplaying when they ignore his minmaxing but has no trouble ignoring his own minmaxing to leap into Alice's maximized niche.

The GM needs to be responsible for all of the players & bob ion that situation is actively bodychecking alice out of her own niche while the spotlight should be pointing at her.

I guess I am looking at it from the PoV of as a group we are trying to get X done and move on. If X is causing an issue and thinking up Y gets us around it the moment, that is more important than "This one time my maximized character thing didn't work out like I think it should." On average, the character with the higher bonus who has bought into the approach the group is going with is going to do the finding - so I have no problem is Grog the Drunken Barbarian with a Head Injury benefitted from "dumb luck" in the form of tweaking the narrative for that scene.

This may just be what I have come to call "The ENWorld Effect" where distaste or disagreement about something is outsized from its actual manifestation because of who the people who post here tend to be and the recycling of arguments, but there seems to be a strong strain of people who think that anything bad or inconvenient that happens to their characters in game is a "punishment," and I just don't get it.

It is not that I have never run into a DM like that (though not for decades) but they really can't be all that common can they? Isn't just more likely that when you go exploring dark holes full of monsters or get involved in court politics or whatever, bad things are bound to happen?
I think a lot of the talking-past on this site comes form dueling strawmen:

There are more than two way to handle searching a room - but some people seem to think anyone who uses the phrase "perception check" is resolving the entire scene with a single die roll and precluding all description, and anyone who allows descriptions is both ignoring wisdom and forcing players to describe every muscle movement as they interact with the environment.

While such dm's exist, the former have players who hate searching and the latter have players who love it. Most people balance the two based o a host of factors that an average dm can absolutely handle, not the least of which is who's having fun at the moment.

Anywho, re: video games. The crafting one really annoys me, mostly because there isn't a simple solution. The rest are just adjusting your expectation of how DnD plays compared to other games.


CR 1/8
Sure. But again, how common are they really?
Tbh, I can't imagine they're all that common. Or at least nowhere near as common as conflicting playstyle expectations, or even just personality clashes.

That said, the few awful GMs (or players) that do exist probably have had negative effects that stretch farther than their unwashed neckbeards (or petulant whinyness) might suggest.


Moderator Emeritus
Enough where I never ever join a long term campaign with people I dont know. I always start with one shots and work up.

Well, that just seems like a good approach given there are a myriad of reasons why a player/group/DM might not be a good fit that fall far short of getting jerked around by a punitive DM.


CR 1/8
There are more than two way to handle searching a room - but some people seem to think anyone who uses the phrase "perception check" is resolving the entire scene with a single die roll and precluding all description, and anyone who allows descriptions is both ignoring wisdom and forcing players to describe every muscle movement as they interact with the environment.
Exactly this. It's not like there's no middle ground between the two poles; and the vast majority of groups fall somewhere in that space. And they probably do so without even explicitly thinking about it in the way one does in a discussion like this.


Moderator Emeritus
Oh and by the way, speaking of U1 - The Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh. .. when I ran it for one of my current groups, one of the PCs insisted on searching the attic because he was certain there must be something valuable there, but all he found were some porcelain doll eyes worth a few silver and a flock of mosquito-bats (stirges) that nearly killed him.

His character keeps those cheap eyes in his pocket as a reminder that searching every possible inch of a place out of a sense of greed is a bad idea and the player brings it up (good naturedly) whenever he is picked to do something on his own.

I call that using the bad consequences towards building a character and having fun in the process.


CR 1/8
Excerpt from my last session of D&D....
DM: Okay then, here's my Description roll... 16.
Player: Whoah! I roll a Do Something check, 12. Meh.
DM: That's works. I roll another Description... 7. Ugh, sorry.
Player: Hmm.. This time I'll use a... umm... a Do Something Else check, 16.
DM: Ah! Okay, time break out the old Conflict roll here... That's a 15.
Player: Yikes! Well, here goes my Resolve Conflict check. Nat 20! Woohoo!
DM: Niiiice! Okay, let's see your Loot check. Don't forget to roll with advantage....
WotC, I'm available for design work. Call me!
Look out 6th edition, here I come!

Scruffy nerf herder

Toaster Loving AdMech Boi
Hah, I actually got some people to play D&D whose first “RPG” game was Atari’s Adventure.

A lot of the issues listed in the article didn’t come from video games, but TTRPG issue from way back. No play style is absolute, and no DM is perfect. Learn/know your audience and use it to leverage the good aspects of your game. Understand that some things that work in video games won’t translate well to the tabletop - everyone’s there at the table for fun, pay attention to what your players react to and you can’t go too far wrong.

As for players defining clues; I’ve actually seen this in a couple games where players latch onto frivolous information or come up with a theory about something, and the DM running with it whether it was originally true information or not (“Old man Katan is behind the murders - he’s the only one whose whereabouts we haven’t been able to colloberate with the rest of the townsfolk” [even though the DM originally had that the old geezer was in his bed, but now decides the monster has disposed of the real Katan and was now using his form]). It’s not something a lot of DMs might do, but again - know your audience, and if it works for the group so they aren’t hemming and hawing and stuck figuring out the original solution, go for it.

Really, that's not something that most DMs do? Being ready to improvise if necessary was my first concern when learning to DM.


Sure. But again, how common are they really?
common enough that I know multi players that wont commit to new games without trying out 1 shots or short run ones first... cause once bitten twice shy...

common enough that back precovid when I was regularly at our local gaming store people still warned people about a few DMs

common enough that Becky still today 30+ years after sitting with me and reading the 2e PHB to learn how to play has to defend that she 'really is a gamer' at least a few times a year

Remove ads

Remove ads


Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases