Numbers vs. roleplaying

[FireLance]

FireLance said that in a well-run campaign, characters have to "rely on roleplaying"* at high levels just as much as they had to at low levels.

* I assume this means "rely on diplomacy"... "Roleplaying" means playing your character's role, which doesn't imply giving speeches. If a PC can end a problem quickly and easily by killing a monster or casting a spell, rather than spending months gathering allies and information, not doing so would be rather poor roleplaying.

Uh, actually I said that roleplaying is just as important or more important at high levels, and I do not equate roleplaying with diplomacy. Diplomacy by the rules is just another expression of numbers and is not roleplaying. If a player can end a problem quickly and easily by killing a monster or casting a spell, but chooses not to do so because the character would not, that would be roleplaying.

As some posters have mentioned, at high levels, survival is not such a pressing issue, and the characters have more scope to be generous, merciful and compassionate without being ground into mincemeat. Of course, they can still decide to roleplay as vicious, paranoid, bloodthirsty adventurers, but at least they have the choice.

 

[driver8]

First off, doesnt soemone's sig ask "When did DnD stop being a game, and become interactive storytelling?" (or something to that effect)

Anyway, while I like roleplaying, getting into my character, creating a backstory and all of that, I like the nuts and bolts of DnD. You know the stuff that makes DnD diferent from other rolpeplaying games.

DnD has its on unique mechanics, 3e does, so did 2e. It was fun to pick a kit you thought would work tactically, its fun now to plan and plot the route your gonna take with your feats. The math can get in the way, but figuring out the skills, the best stuff for optimum AC, and choosing a great weapon or spell is fun too.

To say nothing of combat..or loot..or magic items.

Umm what was my point? I guess that wheteher you play 3.5 or Amber or White Wolf, the rules only get in the way as much as you let them. The number crunching can be a challenge, but rule one is to have fun.

 

[vulcan_idic]

If you really like 'telling a story' I suggest you become a writer, as most players like having some control over what happens.

I do write. And my favorite part of D&D is the "story" aspect of it... but it's a story told by everyone, all the players equally (the DM is a player too, I think). I think the best way to explain it is to quote Benjamin Sisko explaining linear time to the wormhole aliens in the very first episode of DS9:

Sisko: It's a game that Jake and I play on the holodeck... it's called Baseball!
Catcher Wormhole Alien: Baseball? What is this?
Sisko. I was afraid you'd ask that. (Thinks a moment.) I throw this ball to you, and this other player stands between us with a bat, a stick, and he... and he tries to hit the ball between these two white lines. (Looks back, sees confused faces) uh... The rules aren't important. What's important is... it's linear! Every time I throw this ball, a hundred different things can happen in a game. He might swing and miss. He might hit it. The point is, you never know. You try to anticipate... set a strategy for all the possibilities as best you can, but in the end it comes down to throwing one pitch after another, and seeing what happens. With each new consequence the game begins to take shape...
Batter Wormhole Alien: (starting to get it) ...and you have no idea what that shape is until it is completed...
Sisko: That's right! In fact, the game wouldn't be worth playing if we knew what was going to happen.

The same could be applied to any game people play, that's why we play them - if we knew what was going to happen, only the winners would play the lottery (which would make them dissappear since they wouldn't be making money), and how much fun would it be to play pool, or poker, or hearts, or whist if you knew exactly how it was going to play out? That's why even with books you love to reread you have to give it a little time between readings so you can forget just enough so you can rediscover it anew, not remembering exatly how it comes out - you still know the ending, but you forget the little wrinkles, the twists and turns in the road.

And whether you're playing a math game or a roleplaying game, what makes it a game is finding out what the next session will bring - the DM doesn't know it fully - there's a lot out of his control in the players hands - the players don't know, no one knows for sure until the dice have landed, the roles have been played, and the dust has cleared, and that's when you have a completed story. A story that, good or bad, will probably be told again, somewhere, sometime. And then the next game starts, the new story begins to be told... What will happen? No one knows for sure... the fun is finding out.

 

[der_kluge]

All good arguments, yes, and all good comments to boot.

I think the crux of the matter is - what is role-playing? I think if you consider -just- the idea of personality and unique mannerisms of a character to be role-playing, then certainly level doesn't have any impact on that. I think it can *alter* it, but certainly there is room for role-playing at any level.

I think it *changes*, though to fit the mold of the character. A 20th level character will obviously react far differently to people around them than the same 1st level commoner would.


But, the approach I was considering, and I think it's in-line with where the intent of this thread was going, was to encompass problem-solving in the mix.

So, I think we could all agree that problem-solving on the part of the *players* does definitely decrease drastically as level increases. And yes, that's true for any game system you play. I agree with that.

 

[Doug McCrae]

And whether you're playing a math game or a roleplaying game, what makes it a game is finding out what the next session will bring - the DM doesn't know it fully - there's a lot out of his control in the players hands - the players don't know, no one knows for sure until the dice have landed, the roles have been played, and the dust has cleared, and that's when you have a completed story.

So what makes it a completed story, and not just a completed game? After all, when an exciting baseball match finishes the fans don't say "What a great story!"

 

[vulcan_idic]

So what makes it a completed story, and not just a completed game? After all, when an exciting baseball match finishes the fans don't say "What a great story!"

I wouldn't guess that they would. Not everyone thinks about it in those terms. But if you think about how over time they go back to that game and say, "Remember that game? Remember when..." or "Son, let me tell you about a game I once saw..." You want to know a secret? You know what those people are telling? They're telling stories.

And even if that wasn't so - this isn't baseball, that wasn't the point of that quote. If that was the point you got, you missed the point. The point of baseball, is to try and hit a ball between two white lines (in a vast overgeneralization), the point of a role playing game is to "play roles". And, for me at least, when the roles have been played and well played, there has been tension, hope, fears, regret, triumph, defeat, and in the end all of us together told a fascinating story.

 

[Zappo]

Uh, actually I said that roleplaying is just as important or more important at high levels, and I do not equate roleplaying with diplomacy.

Sorry. I was thinking more about die_kluge's post, where he emphasizes the problem-solving nature of the game. Since roleplaying by itself doesn't solve problems, I got the impression from his post that he meant diplomacy and maybe puzzle-solving (which is a problem-solving tool and is often, IMO mistakenly, associated with roleplaying).

 

[Zappo]

So, I think we could all agree that problem-solving on the part of the *players* does definitely decrease drastically as level increases. And yes, that's true for any game system you play. I agree with that.

I think that the skilled DM can arrange things so that the players' problem-solving skills are required even at high levels. But I do agree that this becomes more and more difficult.

 

[Doug McCrae]

And, for me at least, when the roles have been played and well played, there has been tension, hope, fears, regret, triumph, defeat, and in the end all of us together told a fascinating story.

Any human activity, when it's described afterwards, counts as a story. But the story resides in the telling, not the activity itself. Likewise, describing what happened in a roleplaying game, after the game is over, is a story. But actually playing the rpg is not a story, any more than playing a baseball game is a story.

 

[vulcan_idic]

Any human activity, when it's described afterwards, counts as a story. But the story resides in the telling, not the activity itself. Likewise, describing what happened in a roleplaying game, after the game is over, is a story. But actually playing the rpg is not a story, any more than playing a baseball game is a story.

OK. You say to-may-to, I say to-mah-to, what do you say we call the whole thing off? After all, it's a game and when you get right down to it, however you look at it, the important thing is having fun. Sorry I offended you, lets just agree to disagree.