How Would You Reinvent Roleplaying?

[Afrodyte]

The thing I find interesting about what people are saying so far is that many non-mainstream games (as in not D20, Steve Jackson Games, or White Wolf games) do or encourage exactly the sorts of things that everyone would like. A lot of them (like mine) are even free.

In any case, one of the things I would change about RPGs (especially fantasy RPGs) is reinventing how setting is conceived and executed. Too much of setting design tries to mimic Tolkien in the sense of having history, languages, and cultures so rich and detailed that you need a small bookshelf to hold them all. Or rather, it'd be neat to see fewer specific settings and more generalized settings. Heck, maybe instead of latching onto settings, we instead use genres. More books like "Darkness and Dread" would be great. The new World of Darkness stuff is going in a direction I like with regards to that, though more examples that are not World of Darkness would be nice.

In addition, I'd focus less on adventure (which is sort of a subset of story) and more on story and myth. And I don't mean this in a pretentious way at all. It's just that a lot of people think roleplaying is incomplete without combat or adventure not because it actually is, but because so much of their experience and so much space in the books they own are devoted to it. It'd be a nice switch from understanding RPing as an offshoot of wargaming to understanding RPing as myth and story co-creation. Ironically, directly linking RPing to myth-making is more Tolkienesque than constantly recreating the tropes and trappings of Middle-earth. I like Elves, but even the evil Eldar can seem too much like good Catholics (not surprising considering Tolkien's faith).

 

[Crothian]

I'd change the way stories are precieved by other gamers. In each persons game the only thing that you really have to share are the characters and the campaign. But when you see gamers talking to people especially the publishers it just seems the person hearing the story is just looking for a way to end the conversation.

 

[Sholari]

This suggests six specific enhancements: game systems enhancements that improve character assumption, game systems enhancements that improve sensory immersion, game systems enhancements that improve experiential actualization, personal involvement enhancements that improve character assumption, personal involvement enhancements that improve sensory immersion, and personal involvement enhancements that improve experiential actualization.

Quite an interesting breakdown. The only other thing I would add to that are the social aspects of roleplaying. I think people often ignore that, but it is one of the strengths that table top rping has over online roleplaying. Not to say it doesn't exist online, but its a much different asthetic.

 

[Wayside]

For years now -- since the mid-80s, at least, I've thought it might be fun to play a game in which the players actually didn't have character sheets (although the GM would) or know their stats -- just a pretty good idea of what they were good at, what they were marginal at, and what they sucked at. GM would make all dice rolls too. The hope was that this would be a more immersive experience, with the players putting the metagame out of their heads, and concentrate on what's really happening in the way that their characters would.

This is how I run games, for the same reasons you list. Give it a shot in a one-off, if nothing else, maybe with a system your players don't know very well, or with some changes to the 3.x stock numbers. Getting rid of the PC-side number crunching is nice in itself, but if they still have the MM memorized the effect is blunted. This approach facilitates mood-based games, say CoC, especially well, too.