Do you "roleplay" in non-TTRPG Games?

[Pedantic]

You should try Diplomacy. The only way to win, is to role play!

"Lie and betray" is an interesting definition of role-playing.

 

[payn]

"Lie and betray" is an interesting definition of role-playing.

The truth is a poor excuse for a lack of imagination. -George Washington, maybe.

 

[RenleyRenfield]

You're implying Vampire wasn't superheroes-with-fangs there.

Who cares how someone plays Vampire the Masquerade?

My point was never how people engage with the game, its the mechanics. This whole discussion is about mechanics. Game rules and play options as presented in the material.

Polygon is correct in saying that there are at least a few boardgames with more or less functional setting and context material to match D&D. And to back that point up, they state how D&D is a combat game, its boardgame rules by and large. There are no narrative or social rules of note. And to set the context for what 'narrative and social rules of note' are, the examples is Vampire the Masquerade - which has lots and lots of rules and social powers which have nothing to do with combat or any aspect of boardgame play.

So you can play Gloomhaven and have context and rules to match a D&D experience. Ergo, some boardgames are as much a roleplaying game as D&D is. (or if you want to be less friendly, you can say D&D isn't a roleplaying game, its a boardgame people choose to add roleplaying to, but not really supported by rules overly much.)

You can have a successful D&D game with no plot, not roleplay, and just use mini's and combat = and the game plays just fine.
Which just so happens to be the same way you can play Gloomhaven. So.... they are not really that different. Thus Polygon is saying its fine to roleplay during games like Gloomhaven, or heck, Twilight Imperium, and so on...

 

[Reynard]

Who cares how someone plays Vampire the Masquerade?

My point was never how people engage with the game, its the mechanics. This whole discussion is about mechanics. Game rules and play options as presented in the material.

Polygon is correct in saying that there are at least a few boardgames with more or less functional setting and context material to match D&D. And to back that point up, they state how D&D is a combat game, its boardgame rules by and large. There are no narrative or social rules of note. And to set the context for what 'narrative and social rules of note' are, the examples is Vampire the Masquerade - which has lots and lots of rules and social powers which have nothing to do with combat or any aspect of boardgame play.

So you can play Gloomhaven and have context and rules to match a D&D experience. Ergo, some boardgames are as much a roleplaying game as D&D is. (or if you want to be less friendly, you can say D&D isn't a roleplaying game, its a boardgame people choose to add roleplaying to, but not really supported by rules overly much.)

You can have a successful D&D game with no plot, not roleplay, and just use mini's and combat = and the game plays just fine.
Which just so happens to be the same way you can play Gloomhaven. So.... they are not really that different. Thus Polygon is saying its fine to roleplay during games like Gloomhaven, or heck, Twilight Imperium, and so on...

The difference is that in Gloomhaven, you have no agency to act outside of the prescribed areas of play. You can roleplay while playing Gloomhaven, certainly, but it is not a role-playing game.

Whether actually having game mechanics for things like social interactions is a good thing or not is a different discussion we have had many, many times before. But you don't need those rules to be an RPG. You just need agency.

 

[Gradine]

This is also the best way to play Sheriff of Nottingham, in case anyone was wondering.

"Why sir, I am nothing more than a simple cheese monger!"

 

[Neonchameleon]

Who cares how someone plays Vampire the Masquerade?

My point was never how people engage with the game, its the mechanics. This whole discussion is about mechanics. Game rules and play options as presented in the material.

And mine is that regardless of the "storytelling game of personal horror" tagline Vampire has a ton of combat mechanics. (I think more than AD&D had) and entire Disciplines that were basically for combat. And that like Vampire AD&D has social mechanics, mindreading mechanics, and mechanics that tet the GM handle it - and only Gloomhaven really has monster AI.

Gloomhaven and D&D are cousins that dress alike. Vampire and D&D are siblings but Vampire dresses like a goth because they don't like people pointing out that if they didn't they'd be the spitting image of their big brother.

Now if your example were to have been Dread, Fate, or Ten Candles I might well have agreed.

Polygon is correct in saying that there are at least a few boardgames with more or less functional setting and context material to match D&D. And to back that point up, they state how D&D is a combat game, its boardgame rules by and large. There are no narrative or social rules of note. And to set the context for what 'narrative and social rules of note' are, the examples is Vampire the Masquerade - which has lots and lots of rules and social powers which have nothing to do with combat or any aspect of boardgame play

So far as I can tell (it would help had the OP linked the article) the Polygon article in question is this one about Sunderfolk. It does not mention Vampire once. I could be wrong about what a Polygon columnist is saying - if so could you link me to the right article please? (Here's the Polygon D&D topic).

But it doesn't matter if Polygon is saying it or you are saying it. The simple fact is that Vampire is mechanically a game with complex combats and lots of combat abilities and D&D is a game with lots of abilities (which it calls spells), including Detect Thoughts and Fabricate, that have little to do with combat or even exploration.

You can have a successful D&D game with no plot, not roleplay, and just use mini's and combat = and the game plays just fine.

You just have to throw about half the book out. There's nothing preventing you doing exactly the same thing in Vampire. And in both cases you'll have a worse time than in a well designed game intended for that.

Gloomhaven is a cousin of D&D, Vampire the goth younger siblings.

Which just so happens to be the same way you can play Gloomhaven. So.... they are not really that different.

And Vampire is closer to D&D than D&D is to Gloomhaven because the rules are there and you have to throw similar things out.

Thus Polygon is saying its fine to roleplay during games like Gloomhaven, or heck, Twilight Imperium, and so on...

Which Polygon article?

 

[haakon1]

"Lie and betray" is an interesting definition of role-playing.

It’s also a foolish way to play Diplomacy.

3 words: iterative prisoner’s dilemma.

That said, last time I played Diplomacy (in 1991!), I was assigned France and decided to roleplay as a revolutionary “protecting” the small powers and attacking autocracies. The constitutional monarchies of Italy and perfidious Albion had nothin* to fear from the French Republic. But woe betide the Prussians, Austrians, Russians, and Ottomans. Too many emperors!

 

[Reynard]

Which Polygon article?

This one. It is what inspired the thread, but I did not link it because I did not want to actually talk about the article.