Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 6414080" data-attributes="member: 3192">What the probability curve is is predetermined by the game rules, or the code in the case of D&D. The GM could ask for any roll of dice that are isomorphic to that probability curve. That's not the important part. Applying the rules is the important part and what a referee does. They don't play, which is kind of the whole point of having refs and umpires and judges. Yes there may be some measuring involved here and there on the map, probably some calculation, but that's what's running a game. It isn't playing the game to achieve an outcome within it, which is playing a game.People performing roles is roleplaying. Whether it be fantasy or reality. What I'm saying is what others have since said as well. You have a singular schema you are not looking out of for RPGs. It isn't what's actually occurring. If you are like me and more interested in playing and enjoying the game of D&D, the one I know I grew up with and still play, then narrative theory doesn't apply because it wasn't part of what those games were and still are. Nor is storytelling or acting in character what roleplaying was then. And still don't have to be. You just did so with people being doctors. There are no settings, characters, or plots in hospitals. But there are many people role playing.Yep, check out Roleplay Simulation. That's roleplaying. Dungeons & Dragons was created as that, the only kind of roleplaying anyone did for decades before D&D came about. But TSR didn't follow up with that design philosophy. Even Gary didn't later, he even joined the skill game camp after the disagreement over GURPS. By the 1990s no one knew what the hell they were doing designing RPGs but kept building systems which were in front of screens and only covered half the content. Then the Forgites came and basically mocked that design philosophy (which I don't know so well) and 3e D&D design and players until they quit making it. 4e and 5e edition are wholly storygames. No one's disputing that. But no definition can cover all these games now. Claiming every "version" of D&D must be included is poisoning the well. No one had to express a fictional persona back then, they just liked to. That wasn't the roleplaying part of it. The game is immersive, like a flight simulator. Now imagine a conversation with people simulator. Think people are going to exhibit personalities? Knowing that it's D&D many still didn't. It isnt' the game and isn't roleplaying. It's the usurpation of roleplaying into a completely different act. But that's how history actually went. Oh yeah, and AD&D and Gygax's bad advice. Thousands of gamers knew that was horrible game advice and no one should ever do it. AD&D was not the great achievement. It had and has hundreds of flaws. Making the flaws justification for promoting "how people actually played" was Forge followers attempt to rewrite history to conform yet again to the one true explanation.Not Fascists, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist_%28insult%29" target="_blank">fascists</a>, which is a fair approximation of the article's attempt to close down thought. No one actually believes anyone here is Hitler. Instead, let's not try and close this thread .It's nice to see you don't believe games need to be stories. Roleplaying games that are not storygames do not include fiction or fiction creation. There is no "story cloud". There is always a game board that is to be gamed by the players. So no, story doesn't need apply.</blockquote>

Verification