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?

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?

signal-3655575_960_720.png

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.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Andrew Peregrine

Andrew Peregrine


log in or register to remove this ad



HammerMan

Legend
The answer isn't on your character sheet. The game isn't "I make a perception check. 16. What do I see?" The game is the conversation between the DM and the players.
it's funny how much I can BOTH agree and disagree with this one line. Yeah it's a conversation 100%. "I look for the hafling" and asking in the scene that the whole party is looking for the halfling "I made a 16 Perception do I notice anything?" is pretty much the same thing.

The players got the rumor, asked which way to go, and headed off. Didn't ask a single question of a single NPC beyond, "Which way?" It wasn't until a few days later in game when the PCs were about to die in a swamp surrounded by zombies that the players said, and I quote, "Maybe we should have asked more questions back in town."
this seems like a learning experence, and yeah the player made a bo bo... but we all do weird thing when we start
In response to the same poster mentioning players thinking every problem they could possibly face was a perfectly balanced combat encounter waiting to be brute forced...

The players stumbled across a demigod and I sign-posted that the thing was wildly, wildly beyond their ability to handle, what with them being 1st level and all...but the second there was something to swing at, the PCs started swinging.
yup I have a HUGE issue with this one... you say you sign posted it but I am 99% sure the player will say it came out of left field (unless you out of game said directly "dude, this is a demigod out of your range"), just becuse we THINK something is obvius or easy to put togather doesn't mean it is.

edit: I used to have a friend who ran through temple of elemental evil... Uzt the living god showed up but the DM had already OVER board explained a bunch of chump threats... then just described an old man that looks like a wizard that feels icky(DMs word) then showed a picture covering the name. That player had more expernce then I did, and I had been playing for 7 or 8 years... he tried to pick pock him. THe DM laughed and auto failed him "You can't pick pocket a GOD" he said and made him make a save Vs Death Magic (he failed and died on spot). but the player all the way up unilt we lost touch would argue (and I agree) "I had a 107% chance to pick pocket, I though he was a mage, if I got some components it could have stopped some spells"
 

I took this at a very basic level, i.e., do video games kill my ability or willingness to play RPGs in person.

Also this a door that can swing both ways. My lack of interest in video games, I suspect, largely comes from my interest in table top roleplaying games. I started playing video games in the early 80s probably (I think we got a console in 1982 or so, maybe 1983). And I got hooked on computer games that were more exploratory. But in 1986 I played an RPG at a friends house for the first time and it set my brain on fire in a way no video game ever had. I felt like I was there. And while I continued to play video games after that, I didn't get as deeply invested in them as many of my friends and I believe it was because TTRPGs were taking up a lot more of my time and interest. If I hadn't discovered TTRPGs, however, I think it is likely I would have played way more video games.
 

Vaalingrade

Legend
I've been around a long time, the game I play most is Minecraft and I STILL dislike 'sandboxes' that are full off level gated stuff that will kick the crap out of you because you're not tall enough to this ride so the DM can 'teach' me to not engage with the content I'm presented with. If I wanted to be punished for going to wrong way, I'd play Noted Evil Video Game Fallout: New Vegas.
 

payn

He'll flip ya...Flip ya for real...
Also this a door that can swing both ways. My lack of interest in video games, I suspect, largely comes from my interest in table top roleplaying games. I started playing video games in the early 80s probably (I think we got a console in 1982 or so, maybe 1983). And I got hooked on computer games that were more exploratory. But in 1986 I played an RPG at a friends house for the first time and it set my brain on fire in a way no video game ever had. I felt like I was there. And while I continued to play video games after that, I didn't get as deeply invested in them as many of my friends and I believe it was because TTRPGs were taking up a lot more of my time and interest. If I hadn't discovered TTRPGs, however, I think it is likely I would have played way more video games.
I get this. For a time I was burned out of TTRPGs because of groups falling apart and/or bad players. I wandered into MMORPGs for a bit (DDO and EVE). I did that for about 5 years due to meeting some really good people. While in the beginning it really scratched the itch, I came home to TTRPGs again. Now, I dont have any interest on MMOs.
 

overgeeked

B/X Known World
it's funny how much I can BOTH agree and disagree with this one line. Yeah it's a conversation 100%. "I look for the hafling" and asking in the scene that the whole party is looking for the halfling "I made a 16 Perception do I notice anything?" is pretty much the same thing.
The world of difference that exists in that "pretty much". I'm a fan of old-school play. Digging into the details and immersing in the world. There's no comparison between the 15-20 minutes of back-and-forth that is the conversation between DM and player when they're poking around a space and "I rolled a 16 perception". The former is engaging in the conversation, the latter is skipping it. To me, the conversation, digging into those details, actually exploring the world is the game. The check, if there ever is one, is there only to clear up any ambiguity about what is discovered. The check, if there ever is one, comes last. After the conversation, after the exploration, after the poking and prodding. Because the conversation can moot the roll. The conversation is the game. Skipping the conversation is skipping the game.
this seems like a learning experence, and yeah the player made a bo bo... but we all do weird thing when we start
This was from players who claimed to have years of experience with D&D and other RPGs. The other ways they behaved lead me to believe them.
yup I have a HUGE issue with this one... you say you sign posted it but I am 99% sure the player will say it came out of left field (unless you out of game said directly "dude, this is a demigod out of your range"), just becuse we THINK something is obvius or easy to put togather doesn't mean it is.
Yeah, huge glowing and blinking neon sign posted it. It was a literal 30' tall storm giant that was ascending to godhood...that they'd just watched demolish a castle tower. Crackling with lightning and growing taller. So, being 1st level...of course...they charged.
 

Vaalingrade

Legend
The world of difference that exists in that "pretty much". I'm a fan of old-school play. Digging into the details and immersing in the world. There's no comparison between the 15-20 minutes of back-and-forth that is the conversation between DM and player when they're poking around a space and "I rolled a 16 perception". The former is engaging in the conversation, the latter is skipping it. To me, the conversation, digging into those details, actually exploring the world is the game. The check, if there ever is one, is there only to clear up any ambiguity about what is discovered. The check, if there ever is one, comes last. After the conversation, after the exploration, after the poking and prodding. Because the conversation can moot the roll. The conversation is the game. Skipping the conversation is skipping the game.
Some people think this is fun, some people feel like it's basically pixel hunting. "I look under the desk, in the wardrobe and under the carpet" "Ha! You didn't say you were checking in the vase I mentioned offhand!" "Oh, if only there were a compact way of doing this that doesn't take an hour and require listening to every piece of the DM's creative writing!"
 

it's funny how much I can BOTH agree and disagree with this one line. Yeah it's a conversation 100%. "I look for the hafling" and asking in the scene that the whole party is looking for the halfling "I made a 16 Perception do I notice anything?" is pretty much the same thing.
.
For me as a DM. there is a practical difference to this.

"I look for the halfling" or "I search the pedestal for a secret compartment" tells me exactly what the player is doing and provides me with context in order to frame a ruling or a roll.

"I made a 16 Perception, do I notice anything?" doesn't tell me anything. I literally can't respond to this. What does the player notice? Well... what is the player looking at? I don't know.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top