buzz
Adventurer
Apologies in advance if this has already been covered.
Hmm...
First off, I dislike the general use of the term "roleplaying" in this thread I.e., the implication that I am doing anything other than roleplaying when I'm playing D&D, a roleplaying game. It's all roleplaying, IMO, regardless of whether it's the kind of roleplaying you prefer.
What I think people are using the term to represent is immersion and in-character decision-making. Similarly, "tactical" and "minis" are here synonyms for out-of-character decision-making.
First off, minis are irrelevant to this discussion. D&D uses minis because, like a lot of RPGs, D&D is a task-based game that places value on positioning during combat and other tense situations. Minis are simply a handy, visible-to-everyone way to track positioning that D&D overtly encourages. It's entirely possible to have systems that value positioning but handle it without minis, such as Burning Wheel, which uses opposed ability checks to determine relative positioning.
The point is, even if you are not using minis, you are using tactical positioning, because that's simply how D&D works. I.e., how your PC feels about their enemy isn't nearly as relevant as how far you are from them in 5' squares. Whether that's measured using a battleboard or the GM's imagination is inconsequential.
(Aside: WoD isn't really all that different from D&D in this area.)
What's relevant to this discussion is: is caring about where your PC is standing incompatible with immersion?
IMO, I don't think it is. Nothing about D&D's combat system prevents the player from basing their decisions on in-character knowledge. E.g., just because some heroic action your paladin would take may incur multiple AoOs doesn't mean that you can't still have him do it.
Of course, the flip side is: does D&D reward you for making decisions based on in-character knowledge, even if they put your character at risk? Not really. That said, D&D is not exceptional in this regard, and never really has been. Ditto most other popular RPGs: WoD, GURPS, HERO, Palladium, BRP, etc.
Ergo, if you want to talk about "encouraging roleplaying," you have to talk about systems that reward the kind of play you're after. The Riddle of Steel was mentioned earlier, and rightfully. In that game, you are very overtly rewarded for pursuing goals important to the character; if you're in a situation that involves one of your Spiritual Attributes, you get a bunch of bonuses. Similarly, in Burning Wheel, acting in accordance with your PC's Beliefs, Insticts, and Traits is the primary way you earn the (rough) equivalent of d20's XP and Action Points.
So, forget about minis. Minis don't matter. What matters is whether the system rewards the kind of play you're after. If it doesn't, you can either modify it or, better yet, find a system that does as-is.
Back to D&D specifically...
IMO, you get a lot of help in the immersion department when combat matters. I mean, D&D is fundamentally a game about killing things and taking their stuff; this, imo, is fact. However, that is in no way incompatible with grand stories and intricate plots. The key is simply that said grandeur and intricacy needs to hinge on the things you kill and the stuff you take. Crawling through dungeons is fun, sure, but I think it's even more fun when said crawling, e.g., could determine whether my PC's sister lives or dies.
D&D is about situation. If the situation isn't compelling, then that feeling of playing a glorified DDM skirmish isn't going to be far behind, whether you're using minis or not.
Hmm...
First off, I dislike the general use of the term "roleplaying" in this thread I.e., the implication that I am doing anything other than roleplaying when I'm playing D&D, a roleplaying game. It's all roleplaying, IMO, regardless of whether it's the kind of roleplaying you prefer.
What I think people are using the term to represent is immersion and in-character decision-making. Similarly, "tactical" and "minis" are here synonyms for out-of-character decision-making.
First off, minis are irrelevant to this discussion. D&D uses minis because, like a lot of RPGs, D&D is a task-based game that places value on positioning during combat and other tense situations. Minis are simply a handy, visible-to-everyone way to track positioning that D&D overtly encourages. It's entirely possible to have systems that value positioning but handle it without minis, such as Burning Wheel, which uses opposed ability checks to determine relative positioning.
The point is, even if you are not using minis, you are using tactical positioning, because that's simply how D&D works. I.e., how your PC feels about their enemy isn't nearly as relevant as how far you are from them in 5' squares. Whether that's measured using a battleboard or the GM's imagination is inconsequential.
(Aside: WoD isn't really all that different from D&D in this area.)
What's relevant to this discussion is: is caring about where your PC is standing incompatible with immersion?
IMO, I don't think it is. Nothing about D&D's combat system prevents the player from basing their decisions on in-character knowledge. E.g., just because some heroic action your paladin would take may incur multiple AoOs doesn't mean that you can't still have him do it.
Of course, the flip side is: does D&D reward you for making decisions based on in-character knowledge, even if they put your character at risk? Not really. That said, D&D is not exceptional in this regard, and never really has been. Ditto most other popular RPGs: WoD, GURPS, HERO, Palladium, BRP, etc.
Ergo, if you want to talk about "encouraging roleplaying," you have to talk about systems that reward the kind of play you're after. The Riddle of Steel was mentioned earlier, and rightfully. In that game, you are very overtly rewarded for pursuing goals important to the character; if you're in a situation that involves one of your Spiritual Attributes, you get a bunch of bonuses. Similarly, in Burning Wheel, acting in accordance with your PC's Beliefs, Insticts, and Traits is the primary way you earn the (rough) equivalent of d20's XP and Action Points.
So, forget about minis. Minis don't matter. What matters is whether the system rewards the kind of play you're after. If it doesn't, you can either modify it or, better yet, find a system that does as-is.
Back to D&D specifically...
IMO, you get a lot of help in the immersion department when combat matters. I mean, D&D is fundamentally a game about killing things and taking their stuff; this, imo, is fact. However, that is in no way incompatible with grand stories and intricate plots. The key is simply that said grandeur and intricacy needs to hinge on the things you kill and the stuff you take. Crawling through dungeons is fun, sure, but I think it's even more fun when said crawling, e.g., could determine whether my PC's sister lives or dies.
D&D is about situation. If the situation isn't compelling, then that feeling of playing a glorified DDM skirmish isn't going to be far behind, whether you're using minis or not.
