Reinventing Roleplaying Games

[SSquirrel]

As to games, ask most people what they think of when they hear the word, and I'll bet most will respond with something very close to a an activity where somebody wins and somebody loses.

Hmm I just did this test with my wife and gf and the responses they gave consisted of the following.

"Dungeons & Dragons"

When I prompted them for a "real" definition and further asked if it was competitive I received the following:

"Game...something that is played for fun. It CAN be competitive but isn't by its own nature."

Voila.

Hagen

 

[RSKennan]

Still beating the Hobby Horse....

The meme I'm hearing is, game=hobby. Not so, game≠hobby. Each game is part of the hobby, the hobby is made up of many games. Each game can become a hobby, but it is not the hobby.

You can have an D&D® hobby, an All Flesh Must Be Eaten hobby, A Revenge of the Humans hobby. All a part of the roleplaying hobby itself.

Roleplaying hobby is used in place of roleplaying games. Note the plural, "games", not "game".

So those who play a roleplaying game are participating to some degree in the roleplaying hobby.

Any questions?

So? I was almost with you at first, but you still haven't said anything persuasive. Subtle changes in terminology are not the answer to bringing new players in; I've tried every apporach to get my GF to try RPGs, likening them to theater (which she has a huge interest in), writing (which she also has a huge interest in), and any number of other things. I agree with you that the answer is likely to bring the things only RPGs can do into relief, but I'm still not sure it's possible to make them palatable to society at large. Many people dislike "pretend" anything; rather than create fiction for themselves, they prefer to read or otherwise enjoy the work of others, while often looking down on the purveyors of that work (My grandmother still asks me if I'm getting a job- I'm a writer -16 hours a day isn't a job????). It's unlikely that RPGs will ever capture the same market share as easier 'plug and play' forms of entertainment will. Maybe the goal for the 21st century is to bring RPGs up to date technologically; to collect on the favor of paving the way for video games, and move into that arena completely (granted- I hope there will always be Pen and Paper games). Tech's still behind a good tabletop game IMHO, but that need not always be the case. Great strides are being made even now.

Anyway I'm getting off track, but I've said my piece.

 

[SSquirrel]

The meme I'm hearing is, game=hobby. Not so, game≠hobby. Each game is part of the hobby, the hobby is made up of many games. Each game can become a hobby, but it is not the hobby.

You can have an D&D® hobby, an All Flesh Must Be Eaten hobby, A Revenge of the Humans hobby. All a part of the roleplaying hobby itself.

Roleplaying hobby is used in place of roleplaying games. Note the plural, "games", not "game".

So those who play a roleplaying game are participating to some degree in the roleplaying hobby.

Any questions?

No just comments. We were ALREADY clear on this b/c we ALL already know that the games make up the hobby as a whole. I don't have a D&D Hobby and a RIFTS hobby etc tho...I have a GAMING hobby. I get together with my friends and game. Saturday we made CoC characters and then played some Acquire. Both are types of games ( and I honestly give a rats ass if you dislike the word) and I enjoy both. SOme nights I wanna play Axis and Allies..others I wish my buddy Jeff would drive over from Indiana and run SLA Industries for me cuz I love that game.

A game is something you do for fun, usually with other people and it CAN be competitive. Hell in Cthulhu I'm just trying to survive...competing aginst the bad rolling dice, chance, the cultists and the monsters from my inner psyche that will be unleashed when I see a Shoggoth for the first time.

Very rarely am I ever in a direct competition with another PC (DM characters yes) but some games that happens...especially if you all end up as gladiators. I enjoy competition and I also enjoy teamwork. I like having a well balanced group that can handle all issues...or try to anyway. I also like having totally wacked out groups where there is no Cleric, 4 Rogues, 2 Wizards and 1 Fighter. Makes life more interesting. Maybe a Druid so we at least have Good Berries heh.

The groups I've been a part of have varied DRASTICALLY in the level of immersion they had. My main group from 97-present hasn't really worked hard to get into charcter...we usually end up in multi hour combats with hordes of monsters. Especially when Rolemaster is the system of choice.

See there's the best word. Screw hobby or game...the Dungeons and Dragons System. The Palladium System. RIFTS powered by the Palladium System. Etc. But really, GAME is the best word to describe these b/c it's an enjoyable social activity I do with my friends where we all play pretend and roll dice as we collectively tell our tales instead of pointing our gun shaped index finger and thumb and go "Bang! You're dead!" "No I'm not I dodged!"

Hagen

 

[jmucchiello]

I can't believe I'm replying.

Most folks who don't play RPGs don't really know what "role playing" is.

Doesn't mean they can't learn.

Why give people the wrong impression? Why use the wrong word? People have an idea of what a game is. The typical RPG does not fit that idea. Why limit a player's options—and calling it a game does limit their options in many ways, when a better term can open up the choices available?

If they can learn what role-playing is, why can't they unlearn that games must be competitive?

Also, most Role-playing is competitive like group sports are competitive. It is us against them. We the party, win or lose, compete against the villains. Usually the party is victorious and enjoys the spoils. Sometimes they flee in defeat. If you don't see that aspect of the GAME as competitive, what sort of adventures to you partake in?

I'm speaking here of possibilities. Calling it a game limits possibilities. People see games in a certain way, and that colors their thinking. By calling RPGs 'games' you are shaping how they see them, and not for the better.

People see hobbies in certain ways, it limits possibilities. How does using the word hobby not also give the wrong impression?

But it tells them the wrong thing. It says you compete. It says you win or lose. It says a lot, and not a dang bit of it is what RPGs are all about.

Right, because not a single RPG has a reward system for characters based on succeeding at challenges. Oops, I'm wrong. Just about ALL RPGs reward the characters for success. Success implies failure. Success and Failure imply competition.

They are games first and foremost. More people play RPGs than partake of the hobby. Players show up to games, play and leave it at that until next session. Hobbyists also post on message board like this in inane threads like this one.

 

[mythusmage]

Since You've Been Asking

How I Would Fix the Roleplaying Hobby.

First, by changing what a game is called. Instead of a game it would be called a guide. Such as the Vampire: The Requiem guide to roleplaying in the World of Darkness. Each guide would be just that, a guide to the world and to assuming a role in that world.

Second, by changing what the rules are called. “Rules” imply ‘game’. I want to get away from the ‘game’ paradigm. So instead they would be called, ‘mechanics’. A guide’s mechanics would describe the following areas:

1. Conflict resolution. That is, determining the outcome of an action when there is a possibility the action could fail.

2 Character and character creation. What makes up a character. How a character is designed and fleshed out. Character improvement.

3. The setting. What the setting is. Who and what dwells in that setting

4. The integration of characters and setting. How a character fits into a setting. How the setting reacts and/or adjusts to the presence of the character. Character/setting interaction.

Third, by encouraging in-character interaction over player interaction. This in order to cut down on out of character competition. Replacing it instead with in-character competition. As part of this I would add advice on how to make people more comfortable roleplaying. As well as advice to the player regarding ‘getting into’ the activity.

Fourth, by adding guidelines to non-combat conflict. How to handle intrigue, politics, and suspense. Also, guidelines for handling sessions where conflict does not arise. A shopping trip for instance, or a journey.

Fifth, by renaming the game master the guide. Since it is his job to ‘guide’ the players through the world they are adventuring in.

Sixth, by providing material to assist a guide in presenting his world. Helping him bring his world to life. Characterization hints, describing locations, describing action scenes. How to describe combat without boring the players to tears.

Seventh, by providing guidelines to plotting, adapting to unforeseen events naturally.

Eighth, by changing the design and focus of adventures themselves. Instead of having a locale, some inhabitants, and a plot an adventure would have a locale, some inhabitants, and for each of the major inhabitants notes on what they are doing, what they plan on doing, and what they would most likely do should certain events occur.

Ninth, provide guidelines for motivating the players, and guidelines for player self-motivation. That is, provide material that aids the player with assertiveness and independent thinking.

That’s it so far. No doubt there’s more to consider here, but that’s what I came up with.

 

[mythusmage]

Inquiry

Do you have to have out of character competition?

 

[Faraer]

barsoomcore and Allensh,

Selling RPGs to story-type people has indeed not been tried. I mean actual advertising and promotion targeted at people who don't already play them. White Wolf, even as the number two company, doesn't have the resources for this and hasn't attempted it except on a tiny scale. Many -- it's hard not to guess most -- of the people who would enjoy RPGs don't know what they are.

I'm not with or against Alan on what to call RPGs, that wasn't my point.

 

[barsoomcore]

How I Would Fix the Roleplaying Hobby.

First, by changing what a game is called. Instead of a game it would be called a guide.

Snort. Okay, offer some evidence that this would help.

Second, by changing what the rules are called. “Rules” imply ‘game’. I want to get away from the ‘game’ paradigm. So instead they would be called, ‘mechanics’.

Snort snort. Mechanics imply engine. They imply greasy hands. They imply engineering. They do NOT imply fun (which rules do, because rules imply GAME).

A guide’s mechanics would describe the following areas:

1. Conflict resolution. That is, determining the outcome of an action when there is a possibility the action could fail.

As current rule systems do.

2 Character and character creation. What makes up a character. How a character is designed and fleshed out. Character improvement.

As current rule systems do.

3. The setting. What the setting is. Who and what dwells in that setting

As many RPG products do.

4. The integration of characters and setting. How a character fits into a setting. How the setting reacts and/or adjusts to the presence of the character. Character/setting interaction.

As many RPG products do.

Third, by encouraging in-character interaction over player interaction. This in order to cut down on out of character competition. Replacing it instead with in-character competition. As part of this I would add advice on how to make people more comfortable roleplaying. As well as advice to the player regarding ‘getting into’ the activity.

As many RPG products do. Like, say, the Player's Handbook.

Fourth, by adding guidelines to non-combat conflict. How to handle intrigue, politics, and suspense. Also, guidelines for handling sessions where conflict does not arise. A shopping trip for instance, or a journey.

As many RPG products do. Like, say, the Player's Handbook.

Fifth, by renaming the game master the guide. Since it is his job to ‘guide’ the players through the world they are adventuring in.

Evidence that this would increase market penetration?

Sixth, by providing material to assist a guide in presenting his world. Helping him bring his world to life. Characterization hints, describing locations, describing action scenes. How to describe combat without boring the players to tears.[/quote[
As many RPG products do. Like, say, the Dungeon Master's Guide.

Seventh, by providing guidelines to plotting, adapting to unforeseen events naturally.

As many RPG products do. Like, say, the Dungeon Master's Guide.

Eighth, by changing the design and focus of adventures themselves. Instead of having a locale, some inhabitants, and a plot an adventure would have a locale, some inhabitants, and for each of the major inhabitants notes on what they are doing, what they plan on doing, and what they would most likely do should certain events occur.

Read Dungeon magazine. Many adventures do just this.

• Racing the Snake
• Woe To Mistledale
• Last Stand At Outpost Three

Ninth, provide guidelines for motivating the players, and guidelines for player self-motivation. That is, provide material that aids the player with assertiveness and independent thinking.

As many RPG products do. Like, say, the Player's Handbook and the Dungeon Master's Guide.

That’s it so far. No doubt there’s more to consider here, but that’s what I came up with.

So you want to prevent people from using the terms "game", "rules", "DM" or "GM", and instead have people use the terms you think are better. Otherwise, you're just describing what people are ALREADY doing. If you don't see it that way, that's your problem.

I'll keep saying this until you get it, mythusmage. You're wrong. You're wrong to suggest there's a problem and you're wrong in thinking that your proposed changes would fix it anyway. Get some evidence and present that if you want to convince ANYONE -- which let us note we are now at EIGHT pages and you have still failed to convince even ONE person.

 

[Remathilis]

Do you have to have out of character competition?

No. But trying to stop it is to deny an element (right or wrong) of human nature. Many human beings are competitve by nature, even in elements of life not clearly defined as a game.

1.) The two college buddies who have a longstanding bet on who will "score" the most often.
2.) The two brothers who are constantly one-upping each other in who has the best house, car, boat, grill, etc.
3.) The middle-age guy with candy-apple red 2004 Vette trying to race the 19 yr old "punks".
4.) two 16 yr old girls obsessed with who will have the better GPA and get into the better school.
5.) Tom, the Assistant Manager with his eyes on the Coporote office...

Dating, Purchasing, Driving, Learning, and Working are NOT defined as competitive sports, nor are they games by definition, but that doesn't stop people from competing with friends, familiy, and co-workers. Gaming (or hobbying, I guess) is another area people can compete in.

It is impossible to remove, I fail to see how your changes will do anything to curtail it. Trying to do either is attempting to change human nature.

 

[Remathilis]

How I Would Fix the Roleplaying Hobby..

FINALLY!

First, by changing what a game is called. Instead of a game it would be called a guide. Such as the Vampire: The Requiem guide to roleplaying in the World of Darkness. Each guide would be just that, a guide to the world and to assuming a role in that world..

A minor quibble on game/guide. Most GM tomes are already called "Guides"; Dungeon Master's Guide, Storytellers Guide, etc.

Second, by changing what the rules are called. “Rules” imply ‘game’. I want to get away from the ‘game’ paradigm. So instead they would be called, ‘mechanics’. A guide’s mechanics would describe the following areas:.

Mechanics is a common term used anyway, "game mechanics" are referenced in the DMG 3.5 constantly.

1. Conflict resolution. That is, determining the outcome of an action when there is a possibility the action could fail..

All current RPGs have this, d20, d10, d6, 2d6, fate deck, etc.

2 Character and character creation. What makes up a character. How a character is designed and fleshed out. Character improvement..

Again, the bulk of the player's guides are devoted to this.

3. The setting. What the setting is. Who and what dwells in that setting.

Not necessarily. While RPGs like Lord ot the Rings and Star Wars can be very specific, more generic systems like GURPS and even d20 Modern are intentionally designed to be settingless and flavored by your GM. Even D&D is flavored differently by every DM, thanks to the variety of home-brews and house rules.

4. The integration of characters and setting. How a character fits into a setting. How the setting reacts and/or adjusts to the presence of the character. Character/setting interaction..

See above. You need to have a clear setting implied by the rules, and this definition of a RPH leaves generic systems cold. Otherwise, most systems DO do this, check out Star Wars d20 for a great example.

Third, by encouraging in-character interaction over player interaction. This in order to cut down on out of character competition. Replacing it instead with in-character competition. As part of this I would add advice on how to make people more comfortable roleplaying. As well as advice to the player regarding ‘getting into’ the activity..

Aside from cutting down on table-talk, I can't see any ways to do this. A good group of friends can do this without any major system changes, a bad group can't plan the pizza run without competition. This is the nature of the PLAYER, not the game itself.

Fourth, by adding guidelines to non-combat conflict. How to handle intrigue, politics, and suspense. Also, guidelines for handling sessions where conflict does not arise. A shopping trip for instance, or a journey..

I'd love to see D&D have a more codified XP for non-combat scenarios, but White Wolf has a pretty good one IIRC.

Fifth, by renaming the game master the guide. Since it is his job to ‘guide’ the players through the world they are adventuring in..

DM, GM, Storyteller, Referee, the name doesn't make much difference. Doesn't sound bad though.

Sixth, by providing material to assist a guide in presenting his world. Helping him bring his world to life. Characterization hints, describing locations, describing action scenes. How to describe combat without boring the players to tears..

A good guide-book could encompass this, as well as additional hints/tips in many rule books. The DMG eludes to much of this, but concrete examples and tips are not included unfortunately. For great advice, a chapter like the "Tenents of Terror" in the old Ravenloft Book would be sweet.

Seventh, by providing guidelines to plotting, adapting to unforeseen events naturally..

This can only come from experience.

Eighth, by changing the design and focus of adventures themselves. Instead of having a locale, some inhabitants, and a plot an adventure would have a locale, some inhabitants, and for each of the major inhabitants notes on what they are doing, what they plan on doing, and what they would most likely do should certain events occur..

This is something the is up to the individual DM. Some run a very PC focused game, others make the PCs another individual that exists in the world.

Ninth, provide guidelines for motivating the players, and guidelines for player self-motivation. That is, provide material that aids the player with assertiveness and independent thinking. .

Again, this is up to individual player, though suggestions might help.

That’s it so far. No doubt there’s more to consider here, but that’s what I came up with.

It sounds like you want the game to leave its combat-wargame roots and become more of a "life-simulation" system. Thats fine. I can even agree with most of your latter points. However, these are not the problem with the game/hobby as a whole. A good guide book detailing this information (and some inclusion into supsequent GM guides) might do the whole thing good, but nothing outlined above (aside from naming conventions) is anything my Group doesn't do any given Sunday.

Still sounds like you have a problem with the way some people play, and you're blaming the system on it, not the player.