Computers beat up my role player

[Raven Crowking]

Question: Are MUD's proper RPG's?

The question isn't, "Are MUDs proper RPGS?" but "Are MUDs RPGs?"

I would say that (overall) they are simulations of RPGs that contain some role-playing elements, but are not themselves RPGs.

A RPIMUD might be a role-playing game, depending upon how much the environment is monitored (and therefore, how much it can adjust to player input), and how much of the environment is within the control of the players (who could then act in the role of DM to some degree).

If you are playing a game in which you can consistently take actions that have not been considered by the programmer beforehand, then I would consider it a role-playing game according to Gary's definition because that implies that there is a human element that is responding to your actions.

I would also agree that, at some point, a computer game might exist that is so complex that there is no way to determine whether or not actions must be predetermined (i.e., the computer might be able to take all human actions, without being different enough to allow the users to tell whether there's a human or a computer at the helm). Of course, at this point, the computer (or program) would surely be considered to be passing a Turing test during game play, and thus might be considered a sentient (if not a human) element. I don't expect that to happen in my lifetime, though.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

Conversely, what about a bad DM where you are railroaded? Is a rail roaded game no longer role playing? Since your choices are limited artificially by someone else, it's pretty close to a CRPG.

I would certainly be willing to say that, if the human element refuses to allow you to make choices, and refuses to respond to the choices that you make, the game for all intents and purposes ceases to have that human element, and thus ceases to be a role-playing game.

Which is probably why such a game is so unfun; it lacks the very quality that brings people to the tabletop in the first place.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

In Atari's Temple of Elemental Evil PC game, it's possible to rescue two orc prisoners from one of the upper levels. Their captors are a human jailer and a bugbear. They can then join the party and potentially receive healing (though I usually just leave em where they are).

Please note that you are quoting an example not of why a computer game isn't a role-playing game, but of why a game that follows a hide/run/fight pattern isn't living up to its potential....whether a RPG or not.

In a RPG, the DM doesn't have to know ahead of time that the orcs might become party members. The DM can react to the way the players shape the game.

In a non-RPG computer game (often with an RPG label on the box!) the player must determine what the programmer has allowed, and it is the programmer (not the player) who largely shapes the game.


RC

 

[I'm A Banana]

A role-playing game, in order to qualify as a role-playing game, requires that your decisions are responded to by a human being. A DM...or human being(s) that serve the same function, in some games, even though they are also players...is required so that the environment of the game is responsive to the desires and interests of the player(s).

That's a pretty odd requirement for an RPG, IMO. I don't see what about an RPG really requires a judge/DM/etc. at all times, though it seems most pen-and-paper tabletop RPG's do require that as a means of expedient judging.

And it still fits in with WoW, Everquest, and other MMO's, because those games actively change in response to player desires. It's a TEAM of people doing the responding, but it's still people. They nerf druids and they give you quests and they design BBEG's....

 

[Shadeydm]

That's a pretty odd requirement for an RPG, IMO. I don't see what about an RPG really requires a judge/DM/etc. at all times, though it seems most pen-and-paper tabletop RPG's do require that as a means of expedient judging.

And it still fits in with WoW, Everquest, and other MMO's, because those games actively change in response to player desires. It's a TEAM of people doing the responding, but it's still people. They nerf druids and they give you quests and they design BBEG's....

Actually thats the problem with games like WoW etc, the world never does really change everything stays the same everytime you log on. You killed everyone in Keep X last night and burned to the ground at 10PM doesnt matter the next day if not the next 15 minutes its all back to the way it was as if you had never been there. Here in lies the biggest problem the world is static it can't change or else only the first people do something in the game would get the chance to experience it. In DnD if I go to castle X and kill everyone in it the guards don't start respawning 10 minutes after I start. If I burn it down it doesn't magically reappear 15 minutes later.

 

[Umbran]

Both may be fun, but IMHO, this is a fundamental difference.

I occasionally play larps, and discuss the theory of the games in other forums. In Scandanavia, there's a community of folks who use a "two week rule" - any harm or injury to another player that will heal up within two weeks is legal. And they often claim that all those people who use dice aren't really playing a role-playing game, because the dice prevent the game from reaching true immersion. They say that, due to the fundamental difference between their tools and rules and everyone else's they are the only ones who play real role playing games.

Alternatively, I have a former colleague, a 55+ year old VP of Engineering in a software company, who had no RPG experience and started playing World of Warcraft to spend time with his son. It was quite clear that he had created a persona, and made tactical, strategic, and character-build choices based upon the imaginary personality he'd made for his character, rather than pure effectiveness. He could and would tell stories of his deeds without reference to the rules or interface that are not distinguishable from what we see over in the Story Hour forum.

Role playing games include a hefty artistic element. They will defy hard classification much like genres of music and literature. If it looks, walks, and quacks like a duck - it is a duck. My colleague was playing a role-playing game, and anyone who says otherwise is too hung up on the methodology of the game to see the results.

I think a whole lot of you are confusing "X is a role playing game" with "X is not what I consider a good role playing game". Others seem to be engaging in willing or unconscious elitism, and I find that highly disappointing in my fellow EN Worlders.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I occasionally play larps, and discuss the theory of the games in other forums. In Scandanavia, there's a community of folks who use a "two week rule" - any harm or injury to another player that will heal up within two weeks is legal. And they often claim that all those people who use dice aren't really playing a role-playing game, because the dice prevent the game from reaching true immersion. They say that, due to the fundamental difference between their tools and rules and everyone else's they are the only ones who play real role playing games.

Alternatively, I have a former colleague, a 55+ year old VP of Engineering in a software company, who had no RPG experience and started playing World of Warcraft to spend time with his son. It was quite clear that he had created a persona, and made tactical, strategic, and character-build choices based upon the imaginary personality he'd made for his character, rather than pure effectiveness. He could and would tell stories of his deeds without reference to the rules or interface that are not distinguishable from what we see over in the Story Hour forum.

Role playing games include a hefty artistic element. They will defy hard classification much like genres of music and literature. If it looks, walks, and quacks like a duck - it is a duck. My colleague was playing a role-playing game, and anyone who says otherwise is too hung up on the methodology of the game to see the results.

I think a whole lot of you are confusing "X is a role playing game" with "X is not what I consider a good role playing game". Others seem to be engaging in willing or unconscious elitism, and I find that highly disappointing in my fellow EN Worlders.

I don't agree at all.

Played a lot of WoW, its not an RPG as far as I can tell. Same for City of Heroes. I've seen people roleplay while playing Talisman. Still doesn't make it an RPG.

 

[RFisher]

That's a pretty odd requirement for an RPG, IMO.

Doesn't seem that odd to me considering the number of people I know who've cited it.

And it still fits in with WoW, Everquest, and other MMO's, because those games actively change in response to player desires. It's a TEAM of people doing the responding, but it's still people. They nerf druids and they give you quests and they design BBEG's....

Right. & you absolutely cannot see the difference he's talking about?

Others seem to be engaging in willing or unconscious elitism, and I find that highly disappointing in my fellow EN Worlders.

So, you're saying you're better than us because you aren't elitist? (^_^) Or because you are consciously elitist? (^_^)

 

[Raven Crowking]

I think a whole lot of you are confusing "X is a role playing game" with "X is not what I consider a good role playing game". Others seem to be engaging in willing or unconscious elitism, and I find that highly disappointing in my fellow EN Worlders.

With respect, if anyone has the authority to define what the term "role-playing game" means, it would be Gary Gygax, and I believe that his definition is the best one.

Like all words and terms, "RPG" is an evolving term that gains additional definitions over time. If I could get enough people to use "RPG" to refer to ham sandwiches, then a ham sandwich would be an RPG under our definition.

However, when someone says "The number of role-players has declined over time", which is the genesis of this discussion of what the term means in this thread, I would argue strongly that they do not mean the number of people engaging in different activities that some now define as role-playing. They are saying that the number of people who engage in a discrete activity now is smaller than those that participated in that same discrete activity earlier.

Gary's definition is what that discrete activity is, and therefore is the relevant definition.

Alternatively, we could include everyone eating ham sandwiches in our discussion.

IMHO. YMMV. YDMB.

 

[Corwin]

With respect, if anyone has the authority to define what the term "role-playing game" means, it would be Gary Gygax, and I believe that his definition is the best one.

I have a bit of a problem with this line of thinking.

That's like saying Henry Ford is the man to go to for a definitive term for "automobile". Yet I'm sure his definition would include such things as a brief explanation of the internal combustion engine. After all, that how they were made when they were invented.

So by his standards, I guess an electric car would not qualify as an "automobile" then...

Is my analogy making any sense?