My Attempt to Define RPG's - RPG's aren't actually Games

[Hussar]

As far as poker goes - sure, your current bank will change the way you play. But, does that mean if I add in extra money, I'm playing the same game? After all, most poker games don't limit you to what you currently have. Calling a night of poker a "campaign" is a bit much. There needs to be more connecting each instance than just your current HP... err bank.

And, well, as far as multiple edition games go, well, those are rare enough that I'm just going to ignore them. Frankly it's such a rare concept that it will never fit any definition anyway.

 

[Lanefan]

As far as poker goes - sure, your current bank will change the way you play. But, does that mean if I add in extra money, I'm playing the same game? After all, most poker games don't limit you to what you currently have. Calling a night of poker a "campaign" is a bit much. There needs to be more connecting each instance than just your current HP... err bank.

And, well, as far as multiple edition games go, well, those are rare enough that I'm just going to ignore them. Frankly it's such a rare concept that it will never fit any definition anyway.

I'm not sure the concept of a poker night where each hand uses a different set of rules is any less rare...

 

[pemerton]

And, note, if we want to go that route, then this disqualifies RPG's that have meta-gaming mechanics since you are affecting the in game fiction through out of game elements. I really don't think that's a useful path to follow.

Which route? Nothing in the definition that I put forward has this implication.

I said that, in a RPG,

Those players' moves typically correlate, in some fashion, to things done by those fictional characters and take the fictional circumstances of those characters as an input into resolution.​

Metagame mecahnics frequenty take the fictional circumstances of a player's PC into account as an element of action resolution. It's true that they sometimes don't correlate to things done by those fictional characters, but often they do - eg most people think that Come and Get It is a metagame mechanic, and it clearly correlates to something done by the PC in the fiction. Likewise Second Wind and Action Surge - the topic of a recent thread - clearly correlate to something done by the PC in the fiction.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Pemerton the use of Move here feels like a really odd choice of wording to describe an RPG. I am reading what you say, multiple times, and not seeing any connection between that and the hobby I engage in.

 

[Maxperson]

Pemerton the use of Move here feels like a really odd choice of wording to describe an RPG. I am reading what you say, multiple times, and not seeing any connection between that and the hobby I engage in.

"Move," "action," and "declaration" are pretty much interchangeable. If a player says that his character goes down to the tavern to get drunk, he is making a "move."

 

[Bedrockgames]

"Move," "action," and "declaration" are pretty much interchangeable. If a player says that his character goes down to the tavern to get drunk, he is making a "move."

But that word is so far removed from what it means then. Move has a strong connotation of either physical movement or moving a piece on a board. It feels like a very board game term, and just doesn't capture what is going on for me. I am also not sure I would conceive of each thing a player does as a 'move' even using that definition. There is too much fluidity around player behavior in campaigns, between declaring actions and carrying on a natural conversation. It doesn't seem like a strong starting point for explaining RPGs to people.

 

[Maxperson]

But that word is so far removed from what it means then. Move has a strong connotation of either physical movement or moving a piece on a board. It feels like a very board game term, and just doesn't capture what is going on for me. I am also not sure I would conceive of each thing a player does as a 'move' even using that definition. There is too much fluidity around player behavior in campaigns, between declaring actions and carrying on a natural conversation. It doesn't seem like a strong starting point for explaining RPGs to people.

Watch some movies where you have two smart people in opposition to each other. They will often tell the other, "Your move." Moving doesn't require physical movement or moving a piece on a board. It's just that it's most often used with board games.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Watch some movies where you have two smart people in opposition to each other. They will often tell the other, "Your move." Moving doesn't require physical movement or moving a piece on a board. It's just that it's most often used with board games.

Well, that is a saying. But I wouldn't describe those things they do as moves. I understand what you mean. But I think it is a very poor term to select to describe what goes on in a Roleplaying Game (particularly for players encountering the concept for the first time).

 

[Maxperson]

Well, that is a saying. But I wouldn't describe those things they do as moves. I understand what you mean. But I think it is a very poor term to select to describe what goes on in a Roleplaying Game (particularly for players encountering the concept for the first time).

I agree that there are better words to use. However, those are moves, even if there are no boards. Sayings like that don't come into being referring to something that isn't happening. The saying, "Kill two birds with one stone" didn't come about because anything other than a person is completing two objectives with one action was happening.

 

[Celebrim]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?471687-Role-Playing-The-Game-of-Many-Mini-Games