Play Is Paramount: Discuss

[Gorgon Zee]

I am not sure this follows. The thesis is that as you do your prep -- world building, creating NPCs, etc... -- you do so with a mind toward how they affect play as your primary driving force. The thesis does not imply not doing that kind of preparation; it demands that kind of preparation is aimed at play, not done just for its own sake.

I believe the OP has clarified that by "play" they mean "at the table play", which makes sense because otherwise pretty much anything is "play".

 

[FrogReaver]

I would certainly count things like creating homebrew rules, or prepping for adventures, or designing a setting on your own as "engagement", but definitely not "play".

But, as always, different people make words different.

I agree. Play and engagement aren’t identical.

I think one should focus on the things they enjoy, some people enjoy engineering game systems or creating settings/stories. Others really enjoy overcoming combat challenges or social roleplay.

Actual play is just the nexus, not the end all be all of enjoyment and fun.

 

[Reynard]

I believe the OP has clarified that by "play" they mean "at the table play", which makes sense because otherwise pretty much anything is "play".

OP is me, BTW.

SO are you saying in the post I quoted that you emant the focus should be on your list (world building etc) at the table, rather than the experience of play? I am having a hard time parsing your hypothetical argument.

 

[Scribe]

So then, Engagement, however that may happen becomes paramount?

Play, Prep, Theory, Discussion, Writing, or even Watching?

I would say the audience that engages with RPGs, is orders of magnitude larger than the one which plays at the table.

Heck, even RPG art has its niche, most people are not satisfied with the SRD.

 

[prabe]

So then, Engagement, however that may happen becomes paramount?

Play, Prep, Theory, Discussion, Writing, or even Watching?

I would say the audience that engages with RPGs, is orders of magnitude larger than the one which plays at the table.

Heck, even RPG art has its niche, most people are not satisfied with the SRD.

I'm inclined to say that since TRPGs are, uh, games, that the experience of playing them is the most important form of engagement, overall. There will be those who prefer other related experiences to actually playing the games--and someone might prefer, say, chargen in a given game to actual play, while still overall putting play as the most important experience--and I'm not suggesting we should denigrate or otherwise look down on those people. I think conversations around at least some of these preferences will go better when the people know their own tastes and priorities, but self-examination is not a noted human forte.

 

[Scribe]

I'm inclined to say that since TRPGs are, uh, games, that the experience of playing them is the most important form of engagement, overall. There will be those who prefer other related experiences to actually playing the games--and someone might prefer, say, chargen in a given game to actual play, while still overall putting play as the most important experience--and I'm not suggesting we should denigrate or otherwise look down on those people. I think conversations around at least some of these preferences will go better when the people know their own tastes and priorities, but self-examination is not a noted human forte.

Yeah, and to be clear having something be playable, as the focus, is for sure where I land. The Elf Games are indeed games first and foremost.

Just saying the other aspects can matter as much or more, depending on how one engages.

I'm reminded of a culture (??) war I stumbled on between traditional OSR, NSR, and "artpunk" RPG adventures in an adventure review.

It's a bit of a spectrum I think.

 

[FrogReaver]

I'm inclined to say that since TRPGs are, uh, games, that the experience of playing them is the most important form of engagement, overall. There will be those who prefer other related experiences to actually playing the games--and someone might prefer, say, chargen in a given game to actual play, while still overall putting play as the most important experience--and I'm not suggesting we should denigrate or otherwise look down on those people. I think conversations around at least some of these preferences will go better when the people know their own tastes and priorities, but self-examination is not a noted human forte.

I don’t think that’s true for everyone.

 

[Fenris-77]

I don't actually think it matters it what ways various different RPG hobbyists find their happiness. Some people read, some people write, many actually play, it's all fine. But these are games we are talking about, so the index here is to play, regardless of whether or not that's everyone's actual interest in a given book.

 

[FrogReaver]

I don't actually think it matters it what ways various different RPG hobbyists find their happiness. Some people read, some people write, many actually play, it's all fine. But these are games we are talking about, so the index here is to play, regardless of whether or not that's everyone's actual interest in a given book.

Doesn’t matter with respect to what?

 

[prabe]

I don’t think that’s true for everyone.

Did you see "overall" in the post you quoted? That's doing just a little work, there.