All to often it happens that you have your roll players & your Role players clash in a group. This is not a rant, it is a general census to figure out what side people walk. Often, what I have seen is that the two sides clash. In my experience when you have an equal amount of both types, the group has a hard time coming together, often working together only because they are in the same game. I feel that when you have an extreme of both, the players simply don't work.
Here is a general opinion for both sides of the coin:
Your Role Players will complain about a lack of politics, and alternative ways out of a situation. When combined with Roll Players they will sometimes, take to extreme's against combat ("Wait there's gotta be a better way"). these people can easily feel frustrated when combat occurs to often. Simply because they have not focussed themselves in becoming Combat engines. They feel that fighting though needed, is a tool like, diplomacy that should be used only when needed. The Role Player may even feel that the Roll Player is immature & only wants a fight, remaining incapable to intelligent thought.
Now, for the other side of the coin. You have your Roll Players, who love the idea of combat, and will often design their characters out, along a set path, sometimes, a path of sheer destructive forces, that makes them lethal combat machines. Often Roll players will become impatient when a game slows down, and get annoyed with Role Players. These players have focussed their characters for the fight, to them this is The purpose of the game is the fight. Roll Players can get very bored when the good old fight is lacking, and they have to "wait around and listen to the local baron, speak about is right to raise taxes". The Roll Player may feel that the Role Player is a idiot or fool for always wanting to roleplay & shunning combat, simply because it is the opposite of combat.
I try to keep an opened mind about both sides, but there are times when it just gets frustrating. Currently, my train of thought is that both sides need to come to a mutual understanding and expectance of the others style. because combining the two, can only lead to greater unity. This unity, would make for a stronger group. (Hey don't get me wrong there are plenty of times I am just itching for raw combat, but there are also times when I want to hear the development of the story.) My concern is that unless an entire gaming group can get over there miss-conception of the other side, the rift will always remain. I think that age, social maturity & good old fashioned respect for the other side is what makes a game successful. Also I feel the only way this will work is if everyone is open to the idea, it simply does not work in my opinion if 1 or more players don't view the issue on a equal basis.
Any opinions, comments, or thoughts on the subject of Roll players & role players?
Here is a general opinion for both sides of the coin:
Your Role Players will complain about a lack of politics, and alternative ways out of a situation. When combined with Roll Players they will sometimes, take to extreme's against combat ("Wait there's gotta be a better way"). these people can easily feel frustrated when combat occurs to often. Simply because they have not focussed themselves in becoming Combat engines. They feel that fighting though needed, is a tool like, diplomacy that should be used only when needed. The Role Player may even feel that the Roll Player is immature & only wants a fight, remaining incapable to intelligent thought.
Now, for the other side of the coin. You have your Roll Players, who love the idea of combat, and will often design their characters out, along a set path, sometimes, a path of sheer destructive forces, that makes them lethal combat machines. Often Roll players will become impatient when a game slows down, and get annoyed with Role Players. These players have focussed their characters for the fight, to them this is The purpose of the game is the fight. Roll Players can get very bored when the good old fight is lacking, and they have to "wait around and listen to the local baron, speak about is right to raise taxes". The Roll Player may feel that the Role Player is a idiot or fool for always wanting to roleplay & shunning combat, simply because it is the opposite of combat.
I try to keep an opened mind about both sides, but there are times when it just gets frustrating. Currently, my train of thought is that both sides need to come to a mutual understanding and expectance of the others style. because combining the two, can only lead to greater unity. This unity, would make for a stronger group. (Hey don't get me wrong there are plenty of times I am just itching for raw combat, but there are also times when I want to hear the development of the story.) My concern is that unless an entire gaming group can get over there miss-conception of the other side, the rift will always remain. I think that age, social maturity & good old fashioned respect for the other side is what makes a game successful. Also I feel the only way this will work is if everyone is open to the idea, it simply does not work in my opinion if 1 or more players don't view the issue on a equal basis.
Any opinions, comments, or thoughts on the subject of Roll players & role players?
