Do you "roleplay" in non-TTRPG Games?

[kronovan]

For sure a bit while playing the Arkham Horror Living Card Game. But it sort of makes sense and comes natural with it, as it's character driven and its core rules share some similarities with TTRPGs.

Other than it, only ad-hoc when playing Force on Force miniatures when players felt like being comical. Those rules treat a squad or fire team as a single, cohesive unit and typically there's a leader attached to it. The moments of roleplaying, have usually been players RPing a leader when their unit is almost wiped. Or the leader of a very healthy unit, who wants to do some imtimidating smack talk. It gotten down right silly when players try to voice a Russian Spetnaz sergeant or an Iraqi Republican Guard.

 

[aramis erak]

A recent article on Polygon was singing the praises of a digital boardgame, suggesting it gave a truer "D&D experience" than VTTs. I have my doubts, and am not a big fan of Polygon's TTRPG coverage in general, but that's not really what this thread is about.

Rather, I am curious who effectively "roleplays" while playing other sorts of games. Do you roleplay (however you define it) when you play board or card games, miniatures wargames, or video games of various sorts? Do you talk in funny voices or make decisions based on your role, otherwise do that "play pretend" thing? If so, how far away, thematically and mechanically, can a game be before you don't? Do you roleplay with Candyland? Monopoly? Chess?

Sometimes.
Minis wargames, if it's skirmish scale, yes. For me, the division between RPG and skirmish minis game is just one of whether there is provision for non-combat actions in the rules. And I can see doing RP with WH40K:RT... and have done so with Car Wars, the one time I played Gaslands, every time I've played Space Hulk (dozens, but still in the hole price wise), the playtest of Star Fleet Marines (ADB), WEG's Star Wars Miniatures Battles; it's directly crossover with their RPG.

Character scale boardgames, too. Sometimes, in Shadows over Camelot, almost always in Buffy the Vampire Slayer: The Game. (link for clarity: Buffy the Vampire Slayer: The Game ). VERY much in Candamir: The First Settlers. Some in AH's Robin Hood, and TFG's Musketeers. And in 3X/4X, yes. And The Game of Life.

And, of course, any single-player-per-craft combat games, from Ace of Aces to Lost Worlds to FASA's Starship Duel series. Even when the ships have massive crews - then I'm playing as the CO.

But not so in games like The Great Khan Game or Dominion, as it's too abstract from the theme for it to increase win potential, nor in games like Azul or Quirkle, where the whole thing is abstract.

Operational level games, such as Boots and Saddles don't get me RPing, either. I enjoy them, tho.

Hammer of the Scots is another no RPG element for me... it's strategic, as is Victory and Pacific Victory... I quit victory when they randomized the expansions...

 

[gban007]

A recent article on Polygon was singing the praises of a digital boardgame, suggesting it gave a truer "D&D experience" than VTTs. I have my doubts, and am not a big fan of Polygon's TTRPG coverage in general, but that's not really what this thread is about.

Rather, I am curious who effectively "roleplays" while playing other sorts of games. Do you roleplay (however you define it) when you play board or card games, miniatures wargames, or video games of various sorts? Do you talk in funny voices or make decisions based on your role, otherwise do that "play pretend" thing? If so, how far away, thematically and mechanically, can a game be before you don't? Do you roleplay with Candyland? Monopoly? CheSs?

I have yes, but find depends on the game, and for board and card games find it easier when playing cooperative games than competitive games, where trying to win can override it, though I find this less so for computer games.
Board games I've role played in:
Arkham Horror 2e.
Witches!
Unicornus knights.
Journeys in middle earth.

Card games:
Arkham horror LCG.

Video games: (I'm assuming here that you aren't talking about CRPGs):
Civilization to an extent.
Europa Universalis games.
Stellaris.

 

[aramis erak]

I think there are a couple things wrong with this.

First, it presupposes "how people play D&D" with no evidence. And if we want to look for evidence, what we find are Actual Plays that show, no, the majority of time and effort at the table are not, in fact, focused on combat.

Which goes to sample selection issues.
Most of the groups I've played in or run for, D&D is, minute by minute, mostly combat roughly 70/30.
My daggerheart play is about the 60/40, but the cycle is faster than in D&D, and there's more RP mid-combat.

Second, it assumes that the thing with the most rules written is the thing that is most important in the game. That's nonsense. the thing with the most rules written for it is the thing in play that needs the most systemization in order to avoid arguments and sidetracking play. "I shot you!" "No you did not; you missed!" stuff.

The thing with the most rules will be the thing that gets most used is a trope found in most surveys of D&D players since the late 80's.

It was a minis combat game first; for many, it still is. Just because you think D&D has eveolved doesn't mean it has. the Mechanics have evolved, yes - no argument - but they've remained combat focused, and exceptions in the vlogged play genre are, at least to some degree, not the norm. We know (because Matt mentioned it) Critical Role has some warnings of themes for the session prior. It's still improv, but it's informed improv. No table I've ever seen FTF plays the way I've seen in the few episodes I've seen of CR. Their DH session zero was interesting... but not like mine for either campaign.

Should those be considered normal? Probably not; between cameras, and editing, they're not a faithful reproduction of actual play at a non-recorded table in a private space.

I have noticed, however, a new type of RPG panic... the mothers worried about their kids playing RPGs because CR sets too high a bar, without telling its audience just how abnormal the CR player set are. (Most of whom have far fewer concerns when they see David Hewlett (SGA/SGU Rodney) and David Blue (SGU, Eli) playing the SG-1 RPG. Dial the Gate, episode 8.)

 

[TheSword]

It depends by your definition of Roleplay…

If it’s a broad definition ‘take control of and make choices as it you were a different person’ then we do that with lots of board games. Any board game that has players taking defined characters that behaves different because of their character.

However if you mean it in terms of the third pillar of D&D social interaction side of roleplaying then no, that’s something restricted to specific games where that can make a difference like TTRPGs.

Me reading the Eldritch Horror cards in my Ozy Explorer voice is not roleplaying because it has no impact on the game resolution.

 

[Reynard]

It depends by your definition of Roleplay…

If it’s a broad definition ‘take control of and make choices as it you were a different person’ then we do that with lots of board games. Any board game that has players taking defined characters that behaves different because of their character.

However if you mean it in terms of the third pillar of D&D social interaction side of roleplaying then no, that’s something restricted to specific games where that can make a difference like TTRPGs.

Me reading the Eldritch Horror cards in my Ozy Explorer voice is not roleplaying because it has no impact on the game resolution.

To be fair, talking in funny voices does not have any impact on game resolution in D&D either.

 

[TheSword]

To be fair, talking in funny voices does not have any impact on game resolution in D&D either.

Who says it was funny. I do a very accurate and menacing Ozy explorer!

 

[TheSword]

To be fair, talking in funny voices does not have any impact on game resolution in D&D either.

In all seriousness it might do. Whether I act it out or just narrate the menacing behaviour how I choose to roleplay the character could absolutely cause the party to make different decisions. So I would suggest it could have an impact.

 

[sevenbastard]

100% every Risk block gets a back story, my slum lord top hat has charachter goals in monopoly, and my inspector gets a funny voice and mannerisms in Clue.

 

[Reynard]

In all seriousness it might do. Whether I act it out or just narrate the menacing behaviour how I choose to roleplay the character could absolutely cause the party to make different decisions. So I would suggest it could have an impact.

Sure, but one can role-play without funny voices or otherwise "speaking in character." Making decisions based on the role is the only qualifier (to me, just to be clear).