Numbers vs. roleplaying

[Doug McCrae]

My current thinking is that the problem-solving challenge part of the game, of which combat is only part, and the characterisation roleplaying part are equally important. The game really suffers if either is missing IMO.

Story doesn't interest me especially. What do you mean by story, in the context of roleplaying games?

 

[Umbran]

Is the point of d20 a math game (which stats do what where and how well) or a roleplaying game? The obvious answer is roleplaying, as it is-in fact- a roleplaying game..

I tend to think that, since it is a game (meaning an entertainment), above all else, that the obvious answer to your question is "Yes".

The point of the game is to have fun, no matter that the label says "roleplaying game". That's just a label, words on a page, non-binding. If you have fun playing the numbers and playing the game as a tactical wargame, more power to you. If you have fun doing deep-immersion roleplay, more power to you.

 

[Thanee]

The point is to have fun. Both role-playing and the numbers add to the fun in some way, but at some point they collide, so going for extremes in either direction is a bad idea, generally. A compromise between the two, to the degree, where they are complementing each other, is the best way, I think.

Bye
Thanee

 

[vulcan_idic]

Story doesn't interest me especially. What do you mean by story, in the context of roleplaying games?

I don't know about what anyone else means, but when I talk about "story" I mean plot, characters, setting, mood, and so on. Does that make sense?

 

[AddizAbeba]

fun, roleplaying, numbers

Fun is of course number one.

Second for me is playing a character that has his niche, it must be good at something, otherwise he's boring. So that accounts for the numbers.

Nut then, the character should have personality, he should have his quirks, his emotions, his loveability... and be a little crazy (otherwise he would'nt be an adventurer, right?)

 

[Aust Diamondew]

My players try to be the best at what they do, but that doesn't mean they don't roleplay.

 

[Belen]

I do not think the point oh his post was the deride people who make effective characters.

I think the point was to deride people who choose weapons based on the point spread etc. For example, I remember one guy start telling me that he used the Great Sword over the Great Axe because over time it average more damage than the axe.

This is when gaming starts to lose the fun.

 

[S'mon]

IMHO D&D 3e as written is primarily a 'math game' or 'building' game (like Magic:The Gathering, say) but can be used as an RPG with some effort.

 

[Rawwedge]

It is what it is...

Greetings all
I don't have anything particularly revolutionary to offer you in way of opinion on this ever present debate. Perhaps more of an observation. Long ago when D&D was going through it's first edition incarnation I would say that the game was probably 70% roleplay, 30% number crunching and mechanics. An awful lot of the rules were loosly defined and open for the Dungeon Master's manipulation. I fell in love with the game under that system.
Now that I look at third edition Dungeons and Dragons I see that the pendulum has swung in the other direction so that number crunching and mechanics are heavily supported. Formally defined rules have crept into many areas that used to be left purely to the imaginative problems solving of Dungeon Masters and players. I have a few gripes about this current situation but all in all, I am still in love with the game.
That being said, I bring my gaming history with me when I play. So for some folks I will always be considered a little old fashioned for my preferences of a roleplay heavy style that doesn't get wrapped up in min maxing matters very often.
What does this point to? It tells me the game can be all things to all people and that is a good thing. I think the only reason we even talk about this is because it is difficult to put together a circle of gamers who all love the game for the same reason; and so the debate begins.

Later
Rawwedge Son of Molok.

 

[hong]

I do not think the point oh his post was the deride people who make effective characters.

I think the point was to deride people who choose weapons based on the point spread etc. For example, I remember one guy start telling me that he used the Great Sword over the Great Axe because over time it average more damage than the axe.

This is when gaming starts to lose the fun.

Why deride people at all?