D&D General Could Improv (and maybe Theatre) save your Roleplaying???

[Vaalingrade]

It still sounds like a lot of the 'improv' talk is geared toward removing the 'game' elements and replacing them with personal acting skill, thereby gating the game off from those who don't have that skill.

I'm someone who can do that, but I have players who can't. They aren't comfortable with that kind of things, or are just there for casual play and it's not fair to them to take away the mechanics that let them do the things they want in-universe because they can't playact those things.

 

[Ovinomancer]

You're looking at improv as the actual artform and performance... and by that measure you are correct-- no games at the table can recreate that.

I am not, actually. I specifically pointed out improv as having a structure and building off itself so as to surprise the participants. I separated that from play acting to specifically move it away from performance!

But I think we all understand where we are coming from when we are saying "improv" in this scenario-- the players do not have any script or write-up to what is going to happen, they have to naturally act and react off of what is presented to them. They have to invent their response. And usually, that response is done "in character"-- IE in a manner that they think their character would respond with, not necessarily how they-- a 21st century game player-- would respond.

When (general) you play a regular board game, (general) you usually ARE responding as yourself. You see the board and what has happened, and you make a decision using your own knowledge and reasoning to do something to further your goals in the game (usually to try and win.) That does not tend to include making choices for or as someone else. Now the same could be said for D&D-- you could make a "character" that is just a series of numbers and play the game as you would your typical board game... making decisions off of what the DM presents you as yourself. Perfectly doable and perfectly acceptable per the rules. And I don't begrudge anyone who chooses to engage the game in that way.

But I do think (general) you are selling yourself short and missing a strong component of what D&D (and all RPGs) give you if you do that. The game is designed for you to NOT play "yourself", but to act and think as someone different. It is one of the strengths of the game in my opinion. Getting into a different mindset and creating and making choices that are not optimal for you (the player) to accomplish your goals of "winning" per se, but instead are what is right for the character and the character's journey. And more often than not, what the character wants and what the players wants aren't the same thing.

D&D is not all RPGs. I made that clear as well -- that there are RPGs that support improv better than D&D, which is, at best, ambivalent towards it (I think it cuts against it, frankly, with the almost required need for either GM prep or massive GM system mastery or just ignoring the rules to make improv work). I'm not selling RPGs short. I'm not even selling D&D short -- it was never meant to do improv, it does something else rather intentionally! I'm rather happy with than intentionality.

But people are absolutely right when they say that games like Fiasco are closer to "true improv" than D&D is. I don't disagree with that assessment at all. And quite frankly the main reason is exactly due to the convo in the other thread about whether D&D is 90% combat-- the game definitely has a large board game component to play. So with that being said... I certainly also understand the other side that says that since so much of D&D is designed and geared towards board game play, why not continue to lean in that direction? And I can't argue with that opinion, it makes complete sense. Which is why I try to always make the point that anything heading the other way-- towards more of a theater and improv focused style... is just my hope for what can happen... not that I think it NEEDS to happen. My HOPE is that more and more people begin to embrace the kinds of story-focused styles of game that yes... Matt Mercer and the Crit Role crew... are playing. Because that way requires less "rules" that need to be "balanced", and thus opens players up to not being so gosh-darn nitpicky and argumentative. And every time I see a thread that has like four people going on for 40 pages arguing back and forth past each other about what "the books say!"... I just know in my heart that those mindsets are not doing the game or the gaming populace any good. Getting that wrapped up in "the rules" and "what the rules say" is missing the forest for the trees I feel.

Then again, that's just my opinion... I could be wrong.

If D&D actually made a move to support play that is more improvisational, it would be fairly controversial, given how many of the products for D&D could not be created (adventure books, setting book would look different, etc.). The last time D&D did this, it was rather a stink -- you may recall 4e? 4e was trivially drifted into a story now approach to play, which is much more improvisational that trad D&D play. I expect a fair amount of argument about that.

 

[Umbran]

I just want to remind people that at the end of the day this is a game, and the game has rules for a reason, the YES AND idea can lead to rule problems that can cause the loudest at the table (or most extraverted) getting more time, energy and spot light from the DM then is healthy and sometimes you need to balance the yes and with a "NO"

With respect, I don't see "Yes, and..." leading to rules problems that cause the loudest to get more attention. The attention issue doesn't have to do with the rules. Honestly, it has little to do with "Yes, and..." - domination of the game by the loudest person has been a thing since before anyone started popularizing the technique in gaming.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Yeah, sorry, I wrote that very late last night, and looked at it this morning and thought "that's a terrible definition of improv!" No excuse for ignorance, either - I'm currently playing in a Good Society campaign.

Still, while D&D doesn't have specific game-mechanical tools to support improv, neither does improv itself. With a little work, the players can still partake in some decent improv in D&D.

Well, yeah, improv as a stage exercise doesn't have any mechanical tools! It does have non-mechanical tools, though, and there quite a lot of training/experience that goes into good improv. Since it's unreasonable to expect hobbyists to put in that level of work, mechanics can be a good way to help, if they're aligned well.

 

[Oofta]

RPGs are not improv, although improv is an important element. There will always be a "game" element; it's in the name, after all. While you cannot "win" at an RPG, the purpose is to achieve certain goals as determined by the adventure, character, and player, and achieving those goals is a form of winning (if an only temporary victory).


At tournaments back in the day, you were given a pregenerated character that had a background a general personality. Part of the tournament was roleplaying that particular character, and going against the listed information cost you points. I always found this really interesting, since it forced you as a player to look outside of your default views. Unfortunately from what I've seen, the idea of playing a character you didn't create seems anathema to modern gamers.

I agree but who does the judging? For example I long ago played a superhero game and was given a player. My secret was that I was much younger (and it was implied immature) than I pretended to be. So I played him as taking stupid risks. When what appeared to be a werewolf showed up, he overreacted and used enough force to potentially kill the target. This, apparently was a big no-no to the group but to me it fit the character.

I played this PC as someone who deep down knew he was in over his head so over-compensated with bravado. But he knew he really wasn't up to the task and panicked when what he thought was a werewolf appeared. So my interpretation and implementation may not have made any sense to other people but to me it was quite logical. I still think it was an interesting exercise and of course I try to step out of my comfort zone all the time when I DM.

 

[Umbran]

It still sounds like a lot of the 'improv' talk is geared toward removing the 'game' elements and replacing them with personal acting skill, thereby gating the game off from those who don't have that skill.

Have you asked any questions about how these tecniques interact with the rules? No.

So, you are coming to a conclusion having done no exploration of the issue. Which is fine, do as you wish, but don't expect us to find that a well-founded position.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Have you asked any questions about how these tecniques interact with the rules? No.

So, you are coming to a conclusion having done no exploration of the issue. Which is fine, do as you wish, but don't expect us to find that a well-founded position.

This is from observation of what people say they want out of this exercise.

 

[Oofta]

...
Conversely, you can bring Improv and Theatre to your group! Spend time before a session conducting Improv exercises. Take your group to a local play. Help your players find their "motivation."

Don't want video games in your TTRPG?? Pump some acting into it instead!

Sounds like you're selling a class. Which, now that I think of it, do you have any resource that talks about improv exercises? I regularly make stuff up on the fly because the players almost never do what I expect them to (which is awesome). But actual improv exercises? No clue what they would be.

 

[iserith]

Saying "Yes, and..." to a fellow player really doesn't have anything to do with the rules of the game. It's just a way of making of communicating at the table in a way that is supportive and builds on what is offered instead of negating someone else's input. The DM still arbitrates between the rules and the players. That doesn't change.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

This is from observation of what people say they want out of this exercise.

Who has said that improv replaces any rules?

The role of improv is to make the game more enjoyable by fleshing out interactions. It's like using art to help players visualise the scene. Having a painting or model scenery doesn't have any effect on the rules, it just makes the game more enjoyable.