Brief personal intro and a vaugely on-topic question

[Umbran]

First, giving the let's pretend analogy as an answer here is not helpful to my goal here. I had said I wanted to test the non-d20 waters, as it were, and answers to this question are to provide insight for how people think.

Very Freudian. But soemtimes a cigar is just a cigar. Sometimes specifics of word choice tell you something about how people think, sometimes they don't. Trying to read deeply into a few sentences of a text-only medium is likely to lead you to incorrect conclusions.

But, an swer using the let's pretend analogy tells me very little because this has been used in the "What is Roleplaying?" section of many, many games and it is as likely as not that a person is just parroting this answer and is not giving us any insight at all.

Which brings me to the second reason, which is the let's pretend analogy is a good example of knowledge without understanding. Someone parroting the let's pretend analogy from some game book usually has trouble elaborating when asked "and what does that mean?"

See above. Assumptions like that are likely to get you into trouble - because not only are you reading deeply into a simple answer, you are doing so with a preconcieved notion. And that preconception isn't exactly complementary. If you want to get real information from folks, get rid of the preconcieved notions. Look at what is said, not at what you think it usually means. Take folks at their word.

Around here, folks tend to be pretty thoughtful in answering such questions. If they say it's like "let's pretend" more likely than not, it's because they have thought about it, and they mean it, and it is the most apt and applicable reduction of the activity.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

(can I possibly sound more pretentious? Great gravy!)

Don't sell yourself short. I bet you can.

 

[Psion]

Hey there.

Hey Jack, fancy seeing you round these parts. This is Sangrolu from RPGnet, and I beleive you mentioned you hung on RPG Create for a while.

No one needs anymore "d20 suxxors" posts.

Indeed. We had a rash of them last month...

What is roleplaying at its irreducible? What is the activity of roleplaying at it's most basic?

and skipping tracks to a later post...

I had said I wanted to test the non-d20 waters, as it were, and answers to this question are to provide insight for how people think. If someone were to say, for example, that roleplaying is an activity were you enter a fantasy world and can take on the roles of a mighty warrior or a powerful mage (etc, etc) and go fight monsters (etc, etc), then we would know this person pretty much thinks D&D is roleplaying, or that this person does not think enough about roleplaying to separate the fantasy genre conventions fron their answer.

I would honestly be surprised if anyone here responded that way, contrary to what some folks at RPGnet would have you think.

That said, I certainly would not be surprised if someone here... scratch that. Let me just say what I think. And let me put a finer point on it and use the term "Role Playing Game" vice just "Role Playing", because "Role Playing" can simply refer to acts of taking on a persona and/or putting yourself in an hypothetical situation such as could occur as part of a therapy session, an employer's training exercise regarding ethics, or a night of fun with one's lover.

A role playing game, as I see it, is an activity where participants take on the decision making and other roles of a persona (often fictional) in a hypothetical or fantasy (as in "not real" not in the "world of elves and magic" sense) world or situation, wherein you use a set of agreed upon conventions or rules to decide what occurs in a situation that the outcome would be uncertain.

I would imagine that quite a few people here agree with this view. That is not to say that anything in this range ... or the somewhat smaller ranger of all published games ... is what people here, in general or specifically enjoy. Some of us enjoy other genres or games, but for many people, empowerment with magic or martial prowess and confronting dangerous creatures in a morally unambigious conflict is what it's all about. That said, even for a d20 focus, assuming that is the only sort of thing people enjoy would be somewhat off. Other d20 games don't use mages and involve sword swinging, y'know. Like, say, Grimm or Traveller d20.

 

[Turjan]

First, giving the let's pretend analogy as an answer here is not helpful to my goal here. I had said I wanted to test the non-d20 waters, as it were, and answers to this question are to provide insight for how people think. If someone were to say, for example, that roleplaying is an activity were you enter a fantasy world and can take on the roles of a mighty warrior or a powerful mage (etc, etc) and go fight monsters (etc, etc), then we would know this person pretty much thinks D&D is roleplaying, or that this person does not think enough about roleplaying to separate the fantasy genre conventions fron their answer.

I'd suggest to have a look at this recent thread listing a boatload of non-d20 games that people on this board really like (everybody was only allowed to mention one game; lots are only mentioned in the text). It would be good to divorce yourself from the notion that people play D&D because they don't know anything else, which is so popular on rpg.net. Most people here play a d20 game because they think it does its job very well. This does not mean it's the one and only RPG for us .

But, answer using the let's pretend analogy tells me very little because this has been used in the "What is Roleplaying?" section of many, many games and it is as likely as not that a person is just parroting this answer and is not giving us any insight at all.

Why? I still don't see your point. "Let's Pretend" is a very good example of a basic RPG. People meet to play a game. They negotiate and agree on a genre/subject, let's say "Western"/"Cowboys and Indians". Then everybody has to pick a role. "Cowboys and Indians" is a bit more complicated, because it requires more negotiations as to divide people into at least two groups, unlike most other RPGs. Now we have covered the simulationist aspect of the thing.

Of course, we need a story. This differs from re-playing some TV sequel (similar to a printed adventure) to mostly freeform. If the group can agree on a sort of "GM" (or whatever you want to call him), we have even covered this part of most RPGs. The actual play then may suffer from the lack of defined gamist elements in this example. If the participating people enjoy the narrative part much more than the gamist, they will fare well with this concept. If, on the other hands, they like the element of chance or have the urge to "win", we need rules for the game to succeed. This will avoid the "You're dead!" "I'm not!" trap.

Well, this example for "Let's pretend" may indeed show that it is not the most simple form of an RPG, because it has a few elements that are rather complicated; but there are other examples, like the "Star Trek" stuff we played as children, which may come even closer to the basics. Anyway, I think the "Let's pretend" is a very good example for an RPG with a very limited set of rules and, as such, comes close to the answer to your question for the basics.

It is interesting to be able to corner people so easily simply by saying: "What you just said, what does it mean?" Interesting, but ultimately frustrating.

Interestingly, you somehow dodged the very same question posed to you . If you'd be willing to share the goal of your original question, you might get some better answers.

The Forge is a whole different ball of sour earwax that I would rather not go into in public. I suppose that if you're burning with curiousity, you can PM me about it.

Sorry, I'm not a member of the illustrious circle that has access to this function .

 

[Nifft]

I'd argue that "let's pretend" is a valid example of role playing. It lacks aspects of game.

Wargaming, on the other hand, is a valid example of game -- which lacks aspects of role playing.

D&D is the synthesis of these two. RPGs in general are the systhesis of "let's pretend" with some other instantiation of game.

-- N

 

[Turjan]

I'd argue that "let's pretend" is a valid example of role playing. It lacks aspects of game.

This depends on how you define game. The example I gave has a few rules, though they are ill defined. I'd say that it's definitely a game, although it's weak on gamist elements, as I had already mentioned in my post.

D&D, on the other hand, is very heavy on gamist elements. However, there are quite a few other published RPGs which are not .

 

[the Jester]

"Let's pretend" is roleplaying at its most basic level. All roleplaying is, is taking on a role that is not strictly speaking yours in real life (maybe it's you older and richer, maybe it's a 10th level fighter, maybe you're Captain Kirk or Superman) and having fun with it.

A roleplaying game adds in an agreed-upon ruleset and, almost always, at least one other person.

 

[Krieg]

But, an swer using the let's pretend analogy tells me very little because this has been used in the "What is Roleplaying?" section of many, many games.

Maybe you should instead ask why "let's pretend" has been used in the "What is Roleplaying?" section of all those games.

Perhaps....just perhaps all those games designers might actually know what they are talking about.

Ignoring the obvious answer often means you are ignoring the correct one.

 

[CarlZog]

A role playing game, as I see it, is an activity where participants take on the decision making and other roles of a persona (often fictional) in a hypothetical or fantasy (as in "not real" not in the "world of elves and magic" sense) world or situation, wherein you use a set of agreed upon conventions or rules to decide what occurs in a situation that the outcome would be uncertain.

There ya go. Pretty much as dry bones as it gets. Psion, that may be the clearest, most objective definition I've ever read, devoid of any coloring from play style, genre, etc. Thanks. You wouldn't happen to be a lawyer, would you?

As much as I like your definition, I suspect Jack might have been looking for something that would give him some indication of the roleplaying philosophy of Enworld members.

Jack, although Enworld's raison d'etre is d20, you'll find many system-neutral discussions of of roleplaying philosophy and methods here. And every such thread unveils an incredibly diverse range of playing styles and opinions. That characteristic, along with the intelligence and good manners displayed here, make this my favorite place on the web.

For me, a tabletop rpg can be a little bit strategy wargame, a little bit deductive puzzle, a little bit interactive storytelling, and a little bit improv theatre. By juggling the concentrations of each of those elements, I can create an endless number of possibilities over a broad spectrum. As a GM, the concoction I choose for any given session depends on the game, the scenario, and the people I'm playing with.

As a player, I like a wide mix. At an Enworld gameday in Massachusetts last summer, I played games that covered the entire spectrum: A 3.5 D&D game set in Eberron that was a purely tactical combat game; a Ravenloft game that posed a pretty profound ethical quandry and deductive puzzle; and two non-d20 games that bordered on pure improv theatre (Spaceship Zero, and a comedic Fudge game).

It was all a blast, and since this is a hobby, having fun remains my "bottom line."

Carl

 

[Psion]

There ya go. Pretty much as dry bones as it gets. Psion, that may be the clearest, most objective definition I've ever read, devoid of any coloring from play style, genre, etc. Thanks. You wouldn't happen to be a lawyer, would you?

Um... no. (You honestly think a lawyer would, as a tendency, put anything that succinctly? )