Rules Never Prevent RPing? (But Minis Seem To Do So?)

[jgbrowning]

Is it really multi-tasking?

For me? Yes it is. My brain's a bit off.

Again, part of my premise is that if you are looking at it as a tactical mini game then you have already turned your back on roleplay.

Part of my premise is that using minis (and an extensive rules set built around minis) means that a tactical mini-game is occuring regardless if there is role-playing or not. The only way a tactical mini-game wouldn't be occuring would be if the players didn't know the rules for the tactical mini-game. Once those rules are known, their influence manifests and a tactical mini-game is being played.

You are not required to try to win the mini game. And I'd argue that it is much more fun to stay in character and simply assess what you would do if you were this person, in exactly the same way you would if the minis were NOT there. Then just use the minis to play out the tactical implications of your actions. Put the roleplay horse before the tactics cart, I guess, to hatchet a phrase.

My actions are influenced by the tactical game. For instance AoO change how movement happens because some movement is better than other movement. If there were no AoO rules all movement would have equal consequences. These consequences influence role-play, be that for the worse (tactics before role-play *I'm going to move in X way because I don't get an AoO against me doing so*) or for the better (role-play before tactics *Even though I'm going to get an AoO, I'm going to do it this way, because that's what my character would do*).

The fact that this happens is because of the mini's and the rules set associated with them.

Any rules creates a framework of the possible, useless, useful, and impossible. For instance, one cannot reasonably use Harnmaster to roleply cyborg-mecha fighting planitoid-sized alien intelligences because all of the rules are inappropriate for the role-playing situation. To a greater and lesser degree all rules improve and hinder different types of role-playing.

And just because it doesn't have to be that way doesn't mean it's not true. If I dropped a fierce dog in a crowd and then asked everyone who ran away "Why'd you run away?" they'd say because of the dog. I'm not being clever if I say, "No, you ran away because you were afraid. The dog didn't force you to run. See, Bob and Jim, over there they didn't run because they weren't afraid." Sure it's only people making choices, but the environment influences those choices.

Role-playing is just as possible with minis as it is possible without them. However, I disagree that it's just as easy because it's not just as easy for me. And given that we all have seen the same thing happen, that means that its not just as easy for a lot of other people as well.

joe b.

 

[BryonD]

When I play, which is admittedly a rarity, I tend toward tactical play unless the DM gives me a real opening to RP without it working against me.

Now that clicked a thought in my head.

I wonder how much frequency of play impacts this.

If you are in a one-shot then there is both a greatly increased "win" factor and a greatly reduced "into the character" factor. An ongoing campaign with developed character motivations would be the opposite.

This still is not a function of the ruleset. But it would certainly impact perception.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

If you are in a one-shot then there is both a greatly increased "win" factor and a greatly reduced "into the character" factor. An ongoing campaign with developed character motivations would be the opposite.

Hmm. I'm tactically-minded by nature. I've been relegated to one-shots at gamedays for the past year or two, and I find myself doing more RP than I think is typical for me. Not having to worry about character continuity in a regular campaign is liberating to me, and IME the DMs during one-shots are a little more forgiving (myself included). It sucks to knock someone out of a game at a gameday when they can't just roll up another character.

 

[BryonD]

Part of my premise is that using minis (and an extensive rules set built around minis) means that a tactical mini-game is occuring regardless if there is role-playing or not.

<snip>

But many people play D&D exactly as written, AoOs and all, without ever touching a mini.
Should this be easier or harder? All the tactical implications remain. But no minis.

Role-playing is just as possible with minis as it is possible without them.

Then we agree.

However, I disagree that it's just as easy because it's not just as easy for me. And given that we all have seen the same thing happen, that means that its not just as easy for a lot of other people as well.

But you are not a piece of plastic or between the pages of a book.
It is like me and basketball. My lack of talent and skill is not a reflection on basketball.

But, more seriously, close your eyes, ignore the minis and say what your character WOULD do. You don't need to fret about AoOs. WOULD you run through the group of orcs if you were that character? You know it would be dangerous. Are you bad enough to live through it? Is the reason to try important enough to go for it even if you may not be?

Decide in full RP mode.

Then see what happens.

If a set of rules lacking AoOs made it possible for me to run through a crowd of orcs with no threat, then that would make it very hard for me to believe that world and thus it would be hard for me to roleplay in it. (Yes, I'm being ironic intentionally)
Knowing that running through a crowd of orcs is dangerous has nothing to do with minis or rules. Make your choice on knowing that it is dangerous.
Knowing the actual rules is required to gauge your ability to actually survive. Just HOW dnagerous is it to THIS character. But sitting their thinking, my AC is 24 and these guys each need a natural 20 to hit me is a self-inflicted anti-fun way to go about it. Thinking, I'm a heavily armored (or super quick, whatever) bad ass and I can get through these guy to get to the <...> on the other side, is an abstract idea that is not only more fun but is also much more quick. You don't need any math to know that your 12th level fighter is almost certain to get through and a 1st level cleric better think again. Ballpark it and have fun.

 

[ashockney]

I wonder how much frequency of play impacts this.

If you are in a one-shot then there is both a greatly increased "win" factor and a greatly reduced "into the character" factor. An ongoing campaign with developed character motivations would be the opposite.

This still is not a function of the ruleset. But it would certainly impact perception.

Ironically, I reached the exact same conclusion, but from the opposite direction.

I agree that you and Mark are really onto something here.

In my experience, you are going to do something that you will be rewarded for and avoid something you will be penalized for. That is true with both your DM and your fellow players.

I came to the exact opposite in-game experience as yours ByronD. In my experiences, the gameplay with my core group of friends (gaming for over 20 years) is such that if you make a tactical mistake you will be chastised! If you fail to put forth your best combat efforts, the power of villians will overwhelm you. We play a ruthless and cut-throat game (which the rules lend themselves towards being, as they're written, including the CR/EL system for 3.x D&D). When we're a group of 15th level characters fighting against a CR16 Dragon, there is very little room for error. If you make a mistake, you will be punished, perhaps with yours, or another character's life. In that experience in the game, we as players would tend to be "forced" into the tactical decisions in combat. If mini's are involved, it's even MORE true, because there are now even MORE conditions that I must keep track of to maximize my opportunity (including AOO's, Flanking, Aiding, AoE's, LOS, Cover, Concealment, etc.). In this instance, if my failure to throw a Wall of Force, to protect the rogue who needs healed by the cleric, results in the death of the rogue, I've got to live with the consequences of that decision with my friend, and my friend has to deal with that with his character. Where does he now turn in the campaign for the next gaming session???

However, in my experience at one-shots, through game conventions. Rich, intertwined character backgrounds, and a lack of "social pressure" gaming with people who don't know me, I've found it much easier to "assume and maintain" character. In so doing, we often brush off, or blow through combats. An action is only good as your line/interaction/feedback during it. As a result, I am often rewarded by the DM for "engaging" the character, and further, what's the harm to the group if my focus on roleplaying results in a tactical failure? If I, or another character, are killed as a result? So be it! It's just a one-shot, and makes for a better story.

 

[BryonD]

Hmm. I'm tactically-minded by nature. I've been relegated to one-shots at gamedays for the past year or two, and I find myself doing more RP than I think is typical for me. Not having to worry about character continuity in a regular campaign is liberating to me, and IME the DMs during one-shots are a little more forgiving (myself included). It sucks to knock someone out of a game at a gameday when they can't just roll up another character.

hmmmm

0/1 on that theory......

 

[Melkor]

Great points jgbrowning.
I agree with everything you said in your post.

 

[BryonD]

Ironically, I reached the exact same conclusion, but from the opposite direction.

So I'm 1/2?

So be it! It's just a one-shot, and makes for a better story.

Nope. 0/2.

 

[BryonD]

I came to the exact opposite in-game experience as yours ByronD.

Ok, but it sounds to me like your group is actively choosing to play a tactical game.
I have not at any point intended to be critical of that choice.
I certainly see how that is fun.

I'm just claiming that minis do not FORCE you into that choice.

And it's Bryon. Congrats, you are the official 1,000,000th person to call me Byron*.




* - Not an official count.

 

[Crothian]

Neither rules or mines prevent it. I think though they can lead people to not to it. People that are going top role play will do so dispite rules or mins. People who don't role play are the same way. So, we are left wondering what the people who sometimes role play will do. In my expience not role playing is easier then role playing, so I think things that don't help role playing allow people to be a bit lazy and slide away from the need to role play.

However, there is a factor more important then rules and minis when it comes to getting people to role play: the DM. The DM sets the tone and should be able to get people to rolke play or not depending on what the DM wants.